The infinitive as a verbal form of mixed processual-substantive nature and the basic form of verbal paradigms. Semi-predicative infinitive constructions

The category of finitude: finite and non-finite forms of the verb (finites and verbids). Problematic status of the non-finite forms of the verb. Verbids as phenomena of mixed (hybrid, intermediary) nature.

Grammatically relevant subclasses of the verb; notional, and functional or semi-functional verbs. Verbal valency subgroups.

The complexity of the verb as a part of speech is also manifested in the system of its grammatically relevant subclasses.

On the upper level, all the verbs according to their semantic (nominative) value fall into two big sub-classes: notional, and functional or semi-functional verbs.

Notional verbs have full nominative value and are independent in the expression of the process, e.g.: to work, to build, to lie, to love, etc.; these verbs comprise the bulk of the class and constitute an open group of words. Functional and semi-functional (or, semi-notional) verbs make a closed group of verbs of partial nominative value. They are dependent on other words in the denotation of the process, but through their forms the predicative semantics of the sentence is expressed (they function as predicators).

2a. groups of functional and semi-functional verbs. Functional and semi-functional verbs are further subdivided into a number of groups.

- Auxiliary functional verbs are used to build the analytical grammatical forms of notional verbs, e.g.: have done, was lost, etc.

- Link verbs connect the nominative part of the predicate (the predicative) with the subject. They can be of two types: pure and specifying link verbs. Pure link verbs perform a purely predicative-linking function in the sentence; in English there is only one pure link verb to be; specifying link verbs specify the connections between the subject and its property, cf.: He was pale. – He grew pale. The specification of the connections may be either “perceptional”, e.g.: to seem, to look, to feel, etc., or “factual”, e.g.: to grow, to become, to get, etc. The semi-functional link verbs should be distinguished from homonymous notional verbs, e.g.: to grow can be a notional verb or a specifying link verb, cf.: The child grew quickly. – He grew pale.

- Modal verbs are predicators denoting various subject attitudes to the action, for example, obligation, ability, permission, advisability, etc.: can, must, may, etc.

A group of semi-functional verbs function as verbid introducers, i.e., they introduce non-finite forms of verbs into the structure of the sentence: they are grammatically inseparable from the verbids and these two lexemes jointly make the predicate of the sentence, e.g.: He happened to know all about it. Verbid introducers render the following meanings:

- modal identity, when the speaker evaluates the action denoted by the following verbid as seeming, accidental, or unexpected, e.g.: to seem, to prove, to appear, to happen, etc.;

- subject-action relations, e.g.: to try, to fail, to manage, etc.;

- phasal semantics, e.g.: to begin, to start, to continue, to finish, etc.

These semi-functional verbs should also be distinguished from homonymous notional verbs, cf.: It happened ten years ago (happen is a notional verb). – He happened to be there at the same time with her (happen is a semi-notional verbid introducer of modal identity – the process denoted by the infinitive is presented as unexpected).

The subdivision of verbs into notional and (semi-)functional is grammatically relevant since the verbs of the two subclasses perform different syntactic functions in the sentence: notional verbs function as predicates, semi-functional and functional verbs as parts of predicates (predicators).

2b. groups of notional verbs. Notional verbs are subdivided into several groups as follows.

1). On the basis of subject-process relations the verbs are subdivided into actional and statal verbs. Actional verbs denote the actions performed by the subject as an active doer, e.g.: to go, to make, to build, to look, etc.; statal verbs denote various states of the subject or present the subject as the recipient of an activity, e.g.: to love, to be, to worry, to enjoy, to see, etc.

Mental and sensual processes can be presented as actional or statal; they can be denoted either by correlated pairs of different verbs, or by the same verbal lexeme, e.g.: to know (mental perception) – to think (mental activity), to see, to hear (physical perception as such) - to look, to listen (physical perceptional activity). The cake tastes nice (taste denotes physical perception, it is used as a statal verb). – I always taste food before adding salt (taste denotes perceptional activity, it is used as an actional verb).

The difference between actional and statal verbs is grammatically manifested in the category of aspect forms: actional verbs take the form of the continuous aspect freely, and statal verbs are not used in continuous, but normally used in indefinite forms in the same contexts, cf.: What are you looking at? Do you hear me? The use of the continuous aspect forms of the statal verbs is sometimes possible, and finds its explanation in terms of the oppositional theory as a specific case of transposition and involves certain transformations in the meaning of the verb, e.g.: The doctor is seeing a patient right now; I’m not seeing much of her lately (seeing acquires the meaning of activity close to “meeting”); You are being naughty (= “ behaving ”).

2). Another subdivision of notional verbs is based on their aspective meaning, which exposes the inner character of the process denoted, or, its mode of realization. According to the mode of realization, the process may be momentary, durative (continual), repeated, starting, completed/uncompleted, etc. For example: momentary actions are denoted by the verbs to drop, to click, to jump, etc.; starting, durative, terminated, or repeated actions are denoted by the combinations of verbids with semi-functional verbid-introducers, such as to begin, to continue, to finish, used to, etc. Prefixes are used to denote the aspectual meanings of overcompletion, undercompletion or repetition, e.g.: to overestimate, to underestimate, to reread, etc.

All these minor subdivisions are generalized in the grammatically relevant subdivision of all the verbs into two big groups: the so-called limitive and unlimitive verbs. Limitive verbs present a process as potentially limited, directed towards reaching a certain border point, beyond which the process denoted by the verb is stopped or ceases to exist, e.g.: to come, to sit down, to bring, to drop, etc. Unlimitive verbs present the process as potentially not limited by any border point, e.g .: to go, to sit, to carry, to exist, etc.

Some limitive and unlimitive verbs form semantically opposed pairs, denoting roughly the same actual process presented as either potentially limited or unlimited, cf.: to come – to go, to sit down – to sit, to bring – to carry; other verbs have no aspective counterparts, e.g.: to be, to exist (unlimitive), to drop (limitive).

But the bulk of English verbs can present the action as either limitive or unlimitive in different contexts. Traditionally such verbs are treated as verbs of double, or mixed aspective nature. In terms of the theory of oppositions the lexical opposition between limitive and unlimitive verbs is easily neutralized; this makes the borderline between the two aspective groups of verbs rather free, e.g.: Don’t laugh – this is a serious matter (unlimitive use, basic function of the verb laugh); He laughed and left the room (limitive use, neutralization). The aspective subdivision of the verbs is closely connected with the previously described subdivision of the verbs into actional and statal (limitive verbs can be only actional, while unlimitive verbs can denote both actions and states) and it is also grammatically relevant for the expression of the grammatical category of aspect.

English limitive and unlimitive verbs do not coincide with the Ukrainian perfective and imperfective aspective verbal subclasses, which denote the actual conclusion or non-conclusion of the process: He came early yesterday (Він прийшов учора рано). – He came to us every day (Він приходив до нас щодня).

3). The next subdivision of the notional verbs is based on their combinability features, or their valency. In traditional grammar studies, on the basis of combinability, verbs are divided into transitive and intransitive: transitive verbs denote an action directed toward a certain object; in a sentence they are obligatorily used with a direct object. Constructions with transitive verbs are easily transformed from active into passive, e.g.: He wrote a letter. – The letter was written by him. In English almost every verb can be passivized, e.g.: to walk is an intransitive verb, but it is possible to say She was walked out of the room.

3. Verbal valency subgroups.

The notion of ‘valency’ allows the analysis of verbal combinability potential in greater detail. It involves the whole range of subordinate syntactic elements (valents, or adjuncts) either required or specifically permitted by a verb. For example, the valency of the verb to eat includes a subject and an object, as in I am eating cheese. The valency of the word can be either obligatory (required), or optional (permitted). The obligatory adjuncts (the valents required by the verb) are called “complements” and the verb itself is called “ complementive ”; without a complement a syntactic construction with a complementive verb is grammatically incomplete and semantically defective, cf.: He is a writer. - *He is…. The optional adjuncts are called “supplements” and the verb is called “ uncomplementive” (or “supplementive”); the supplemenive verb can be used with or without a supplement in a syntactic construction, cf.: They are singing a song. - They are singing.

- Uncomplementive verbs are further subdivided into two groups of verbs: personal and impersonal verbs. Personal verbs imply the subject of the action denoted (animate or inanimate, human or non-human), e.g.: to work, to laugh, to grow, to start, etc., as in I’m working; The concert started. Impersonal verbs usually denote natural phenomena, e.g.: to rain, to snow, to drizzle, etc.; the number of impersonal verbs is limited; in English they are combined with a formal subject, e.g.: It’s raining (in Ukrainian impersonal uncomplementive verbs can be used without any subject at all, cf.: Моросить; Темніє).

- Complementive verbs are further subdivided according to the members of the sentence which they must be obligatorily used with. Predicative complementive verbs are link verbs obligatorily combined in a sentence with their predicatives, e.g.: He is a writer. Adverbial complementive verbs are verbs which are obligatorily combined with adverbial modifiers of time, or space, or manner, e.g.: He lives in Paris; They married and lived happily. Objective complementive verbs require either one object-complement (monocomplementive verbs) or two compliments (bicomplementive verbs).

The following verbs are monocomplementive: - to have – the possession objective verb, non-passivized; - to take, to grasp, to enjoy, etc. – direct objective verbs, e.g.: Take the book; - to look at, to point to, to send for, etc. – prepositional objective verbs; in spite of their prepositional use they are easily passivized in English, e.g.: Everyone looked at her; She was looked at.; - to cost, to weigh, to fail, to become, etc. – direct objective verbs, non-passivized; - to belong to, to abound in, to merge with, etc. – prepositional objective verbs, non-passivized.

The following verbs are bicomlementive: - to give, to bring, to pay, to show, etc. – direct objective and addressee objective verbs, e.g.: Give the book to your neighbor; Give the neighbor your book; - to teach, to forgive, to ask, to excuse, etc. – double direct objective verbs, e.g.: My mother taught me this song; - to argue, to agree, to cooperate, etc. – double prepositional objective verbs, e.g.: I agree with you about his latest book; - to remind of, to apologize for, to pay for, etc. – addressee objective verbs, e.g.: Don’t remind me of that awful day; - to put, to send, to bring, etc. – adverbial objective verbs which are obligatorily used with a direct object and an adverbial modifier, e.g.: Put the book on the table.

Many verbs in English in different contexts migrate easily from one group to another, and the boundaries between the subclasses are less rigid than in Ukrainian For example: to work is an uncomplementive verb, but in modern English, especially in its American variant, one can use it with a direct object too, e.g.: She worked her team hard; She worked the phones.

As was mentioned in the previous unit, on the upper level all verbal forms fall into two major sets: finite and non-finite. The term “finite” is derived from the Latin term “verbum finitum”, which shows that these words denote actions developing in time.

Non-finite forms of the verb, the infinitive, the gerund, participle I (present participle) and participle II (past participle), are otherwise called “verbals”, or “verbids”. The term, introduced by O. Jespersen, implies that they are not verbs in the proper sense of the word, because they combine features of the verb with features of other notional parts of speech. Their mixed, hybrid nature is revealed in all the spheres of the parts-of-speech characterization: meaning, formal features, and functions.

- The non-verbal features of verbids are as follows: they do not denote pure processes, but present them as specific kinds of substances and properties; they are not conjugated according to the categories of person and number, have no tense or mood forms; in some contexts they are combined with the verbs like non-verbal parts of speech; they never function as independent predicates; their functions are those characteristic for other notional parts of speech.

- The verbal features of verbids are as follows: their grammatical meaning is basically processual; like finites, they do have (most of them have) aspect and voice forms and verbal combinability with direct objects and adverbial modifiers; they can express predication in specific semi-predicative constructions. Thus, verbids can be characterized as intermediary phenomena between verbs and other non-verbal parts of speech.

The opposition between finite and non-finite forms of verbs expresses the category of “finitude”. The grammatical meaning, the content of this category is the expression of verbal predication: the finite forms of the verb render full (primary, complete) predication, the non-finite forms render semi-predication, or secondary (potential) predication. The formal differential feature is constituted by the expression of verbal time and mood, which underlie the predicative function: having no immediate means of expressing time-mood categorial semantics, the verbids are the weak member of the opposition.

It is interesting to note that historically verbids in English were at first separate non-verbal nominative forms, but later they were drawn into the class of verbs by acquiring aspect and voice forms, verbal combinability, etc.

The Infinitive is the most generalized, the most abstract form of the verb, serving as the verbal name of a process; it is used as the derivation base for all the other verbal forms. That is why the infinitive is traditionally used as the head word for the lexicographic entry of the verb in dictionaries.

The infinitive combines verbal features with features of the noun; it is a phenomenon of hybrid processual-substantive nature, intermediary between the verb and the noun. - It has voice and aspect forms, e.g .: to write, to be writing, to have written, to be written, to have been written; - it can be combined with nouns and pronouns denoting the subject or the object of the action, and with the adverbial modifiers, e.g.: for him to write a letter; to write a letter to someone; to write a letter very carefully. The non-verbal properties of the infinitive are displayed in its syntactic functions and its combinability. - The infinitive performs all the functions characteristic of the noun – that of a subject, e.g.: To write a letter was the main thing he had planned for the day; of a predicative, e.g.: The main thing he had planned for the day was to write a letter; of an object, e.g.: He wanted to write a letter to her; of an attribute, e.g.: It was the main thing to do; of an adverbial modifier, e.g.: He stood on a chair in order to reach for the top shelf. In these functions the infinitive displays substantive combinability with finite verbs.

If the subject of the action denoted by the infinitive is named, in the sentence it forms a secondary predicative line with the infinitive. Syntactically, semi-predicative infinitive constructions may be free or bound to the primary predicative part of the sentence. The “for + to infinitive” construction in free use includes the infinitive and its own, inner subject, e.g.: For him to be late for the presentation was unthinkable; I sent the papers in order for you to study them carefully before the meeting. The constructions known as “complex object with the infinitive” and “complex subject with the infinitive” (the passive transformation of the complex object constructions) intersect with the primary predicative part of the sentence: the inner subject of the secondary predicative part forms either the object or the subject of the primary predicative part, e.g.: I saw her enter the room; She was seen to enter the room. The predicative character of the secondary sentence-situation can be manifested in the transformation of the whole sentence into a composite syntactic construction, e.g .: I sent the papers in order for you to study them carefully before the meeting. - I sent the papers so that you could study them carefully before the meeting; I saw her enter the room. - I saw her when she was entering the room.

In most cases the infinitive is used with the particle “to”, which is its formal marker; it is called a “marked infinitive” and can be treated as an analytical form of the verb. In certain contexts, enumerated in detail in practical grammar text-books, the infinitive is used without the particle “to” and is called a “bare infinitive”, or “unmarked infinitive”. The “bare infinitive” is used when it is combined with functional and semi-functional predicator-verbs to build the analytical forms of the finite verbs (the “bound” use of the infinitive) in some fixed constructions, etc., e.g.: Will you go there? Why not go there? I’d rather stay at home; etc. The particle, just like any other auxiliary component of analytical forms, can be separated from the infinitive by an adverbial modifier, e.g.: to thoroughly think something over. These cases are usually stylistically marked and are known as the “split infinitive”.

Дата добавления: 2014-01-11