The English Verb System – Contrastive Approach 1 October 19, 2018
Lesson 3 Simple or Complex VP? 1) You should have been informed earlier. (modal+perfective aspect+passive voice) 2) They can’t have been fighting again! (modal+perfective+progressive) 3) He should have been being paid. (modal+perfective +progressive+passive) 4) He decided to go. 5) I don't want to have to be forced to begin to try to make more money. (Palmer 1987: 172) Palmer (1987) establishes syntactic tests in order to distinguish these phrases formally:
TNP tests (tense, negation, passivization) TENSE or TIME? In a complex VP, will time (but not always tense !) be marked more than once? If there are two lexical verbs, both may be independently marked for time. 1) Bill seems to have seen Mary yesterday. ‘Seen’ is marked not for tense but for aspect or time. 2) Mary wants to go on holiday. Clausal subordination, but no double-time marking (!) Palmer states that adverbials of time also mark time in the same way as tense suffixes do: 1) Bill intended to come tomorrow. The problem with adverbials: 2) Bill was coming tomorrow. 3) Yesterday, Bill was coming tomorrow. These are simple VPs. However, tense is marked twice (through grammatical and lexical time marking). 4) Bill seems to like Mary. Some complex VPs are not overtly marked for time (when the situations are simultaneous). Conclusion: The T-test is not reliable since it is restricted only to certain contexts.
1
NEGATION The simple VPs can contain only one negation, whereas the complex VPs can have more than one. 1. Bill doesn’t like that film. 2. Bill prefers not to come. 3. Bill doesn’t prefer to come. 4. Bill doesn’t prefer not to come. (one negation in each clause) 5. Bill can’t not come. (double negation with modals)
PASSIVIZATION (Voice Neutrality) In the simple VP, there is “voice neutrality” because passive sentences have the same meaning as the active ones (if we disregard the possible change of emphasis). 1) a) The salesman was helping the customer when the thief came into the store. b) The customer was being helped by the salesman when the thief came into the store. 2. a) Many tourists have visited that castle. b) That castle has been visited by many tourists. Passivization in the complex VP causes change in meaning. So, the complex VPs are not voice neutral. 3. a) John prefers to meet Jane. b) John prefers to be met by Jane. 4. a) John wants to love Mary. b) *Mary is wanted to love by John. c) Mary wants to be loved by John. d) * Mary is wanted to be loved by John. e) John wants to be loved by Mary. However, the modal auxiliary will of volition in the simple VP is also not voice neutral. Only the ‘future’ meaning is voice neutral. 5. a) Bill won’t meet Mary. (future WILL) b) Mary won’t be met by Bill. (future WILL) c) Bill won’t tell her what to do. (WILL of volition) d) Mary won’t be told what to do (WILL of volition)
2
SUBJECT AND COMPLEX VP 1. Strong winds blow in these fields. 2. The strong wind was blowing in the fields. 3. The strong wind might blow in the fields, 4. The strong wind kept blowing in the fields. 5. The strong wind might keep blowing in the fields. 6. *The strong wind intended/wanted/planned to keep blowing in the fields.
3
4