THE ENGLISH VERB:  ITS FORMS AND CATEGORIES

Copyright by Orchid Land Publications

[200807027]

     This systematic analysis takes off from and extends Chh. 5-6 of Bailey, ESSAYS ON TIME-BASED LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS (Oxford University Press, 1996.  To begin with, it is necessary to be clear on certain distinctions.

       Import includes lexical MEANING, pragmatic FORCE (especially intentionality), and STYLE (social usages).  Intentionality is a category of force that requires special intention.  Because tense and mode fail to describe English verb syntax even when squeezed and misused, MODALITY is used here for any category of verb syntax, whether combinative or metabolic [on which see below], whether temporal, counterfactual, imperative, or not.  In most instances, I prefer posterior (the counterpart of anteriors formed on the operator have) to future temporality, since (a) there are past-posteriors like "It was going to take place the next day" that are not necessary futuritive and (b) there are so many ways to indicate present-posterior temporality (those formed on be gonna (be going to) or will, those using the exochronous modality, and the inherent posteriority of can, may, shall, etc.  For these reasons, it would muddy the waters to refer to a simple "future."  Besides the difference of deleting you in unmarked imperatives and retaining you in marked imperatives, there are many uses of may and let (when forming an oblique imperative) discussed in these pages.  See a summary at the end of this page.

     Observe that a MODALITY is a syntactic term that should not be confused with a purely formal category like that of  DESIDERATIVE verbs discussed presently.  COMBINATIVE modalities are formed with an auxiliary verb; beside progressive modalities like was seeing, there are discussed on this website:

      Posteriors (besides those using the exochronous modality) formed with be gonna/will

      Passives formed on be and get

      Causatives formed on have and get

It is possibly instructive to observe that, while get is the causative of be, it is also the causative of have, which is the flip of be.  (The last refers to the fact that some languages have X is to Y where English has Y has X.)  One item in each pair is unmarked or default; the other is marked.  These characters get reversed in marked contexts or environment. 

     The most problematic categories for English are temporality (tense) and diathesis (voice).  Temporality can be definite or indefinite (French indefini), i.e. anywhere in a span of usually past time.

The EXOCHRONONUS modality is of the latter sort except that it is not simply past but includes any and all time:  "That child misbehaves."   (The form has tense-like uses for future time, which is unreal; see elsewhere on this page.)   CONTRAPONENT are the mirror image of Latin deponent (active forms used passively) uses, being transitive-active forms used passively; when we say "This car drives easily," we mean that it is easy to drive, that it is easily driven.

"

     METABOLIC modalities are formed by changing something other than the verb itself--e.g. deleting you in an unmarked imperative or should in a situation now to be described.  DESIDERATIVE  verbs are found in the independent or main clause of these examples:

     Brit/Aus/NZ:  We demanded/insisted/desired/suggested that she undertakes that job.
     NoAmerica:  We demanded/insisted/desired/suggested that she (should) undertake.

(Some desideratives take the infinitive; e.g. "I wanted/ordered  them to stay; it was necessary for them to leave at once.")  In the examples just offered, note that should is optionally (and in North America, frequently) deleted, leaving an uninflected form that resembles an infinitive. 

     At the level of form, I will be distinguishing FINITE verb uses from non-finite VERBIDS--verbal adjectives or participles, verbal nouns or gerunds, and infinitives, which can be nominal (i.e. nouns) or either adjectival or adverbial modifiers.  (This is not the place to go into details of formal categories of NOMINALS--determiners such as demonstratives and quantifiers, which function either adjectivally or pronominally.)

     In what follows, the FINITE non-inflected forms (e.g. undertake) are referred to as the  FINITIVE modality.  Its form is like that of the infinitive; e.g. be, as in They insisted that we be on time.  (This modality descends from, but should not be confused with the defunct subjunctive mode, now preserved only in idioms like "So be it!"  A special subcategory of uninflected verbs (most of which have a primary and secondary variants) are modal verbs:

 

        Inflected forms like undertakes and its uninflected correlates in the same category are MARKED (non-default) forms referred to as the exochronous modality.  (An older name was SURRREALIS MODALITY.)  While it has the marked use for general truths, as in "That child behave" or "It rains in December here," it has an unmarked (default) use for future time in a subordinate clause beginning with who or what or conjunctions such as if, unless, when, until, and as soon as. 

When/As soon as that takes place, everyone will be delighted.

I'll tell whoever brings it not to leave it on the doorstep.

and a marked use for scheduled futures, as in "Her flight arrives at ten tomorrow."

     While formal categories like transitive and intransitive are still relevant, MODALITY replaces mode and tense, categories less sutiable to current English than to older English.   The only category of English that could properly be called a "tense" is the past tense, but even it has subvarieties like plain did, progressive was doing and got being done, consuetudinary used to do and its passive, and characterizing would do, as in "He would always do that in those days."  A more important difference are those between temporal and exochronous −−timeless.  Note that the child behaves (the exochronous modality) can be true evenwhen the child is currently misbehaving.  Two kinds of language temporality are a point in time and a span of time.   We say,

They sang it that way for two years

where specific moments in are referenced; but

We have sung it this way for two years.  

where a single time span is in the speaker's mind.  The first example is a past modality; the second is, to borrow a French terms, an anterior; anteriors are formed on forms of have.  Note that we cannot say "She has lunched at noon" unless we change it to refer to a span of time, as in "She has always lunched at noon."

     A word on the TEMPORAL THROW-BACK is in order at this point.  This is a METABOLIC modality rather than a COMBINATIVE modality like those formed on auxiliary or modal verbs such as the insistent or emphatic modality formed on do.  We shift the time back one degree for counterfactuality or (in posterior time) ostensible improbability.  Compare

     If she did it yesterday : If she had done it yesterday

It's time it were ready.
If he'll be ready on time : If he should be [were (to be)] ready on time tomorrow.

Notice that was is usually respelled as were in counterfactual uses.  (Further, we cannot replace if with was the way we do with were in "Were things different, . . ."; cf. "Had things been otherwise, . . .")  We contrast "If she was on time yesterday" when we do not know with "If he were on time now" when we know he is not on time.  This and the use of were for had been or for was are the commonest errors of the semiliterate:

     If he were there yesterday for If he had been there yesterday

&

If she were working the yesterday for If she was working there yesterday

DUBITATIVE-CONTINGENT uses of would contrast with VOLITIONAL uses in He would do it his own way. 

     FACTUAL should results from SHOULD-DELETION, a modality that occurs only in dependence on expressions that are not neutral−−they are plus or minus−−with regard to the features {expectative] and [volitive] or [desiderative]; e.g.  "I'm surprised and disgusted that they should be saying that!"  Its analysis requires a ternary rather than binary distinction.  Uncle Remus stories in older Black Vernacular are replete with examples of factual should; e.g. “An’ who should ’e meet but Brer Fox!”  

     Another deletion modality, one that is limited to or copied from a few fixed phrases from older kinds of English, is MAY-DELETION.  Cf. Be it ever so humble!  Notice that this modality entails SUBJECT-VERB DELETION, which is normal in (non-exclamatory) English questions not beginning with an interrogative WH-word.  It requires the insertion of a form of do when the main verb is not a copula or auxiliary verb.

     An English verb like see has the following forms:

VERBIDS (to) see,  seeing (participle or gerund); and FINITE saw, seen, see(s)
in addition to the see derived by should-DELETION from should see.

Anterior verbids can be formed on have or having, while posteriors can be formed on

be(ing) going to; cf. to be going to see, being going to get seen. 

These can be combined, as in to be going to have seen and to have been going to see as well as in being going to get seen.

Examples of the uses of should are, in the order listed above, as follows: 

     We should (ought to) do that.

     If it should turn out that way, . . .

     That they should say that is something I find disgusting.

     I suggested that they remain on the job during this upheaval.

Examples of the uses of may are, in the order listed above, as follows:

     You may beat the rush by leaving early.
      You may leave early.

     May it be ever so.  

     However humble it may seem, it's still a worthwhle endeavor.

  [It has been pointed out that many speakers are now

using might for may and may for might.]

Examples of the uses of let are, in the order listed above, as follows:

     They are admitting them; let them stay.  (Cf. lemme with this import)

     Let (or leave) me alone!

     Hortative let's:  Let's (not) stay.

    Jussive:   Let 'em do whatever they wish; let's avoid a confrontation.

    Causative:  Let it go; I'll let the alarm go off.

    Concessive:  Let that be as it may; I'm staying.    

Examples of the uses of shall are, in the order listed above, as follows:

     They (or You) shall get punished.

     Shall I (or We) meet you there at ten?