There are two aggressive notions of the assert in theories of grammar. Traditional grammar tends to appearance a assert as one of two capital genitalia of a sentence, the added actuality the subject, which the assert modifies. The added compassionate of predicates is aggressive from assignment in assert calculus (=predicate logic, aboriginal adjustment logic). On this approach, the assert of a book corresponds mainly to the capital verb and any auxiliaries that accompany the capital verb, whereby the arguments of that assert (e.g. the accountable and commodity noun phrases) are alfresco of the predicate. The antagonism amid these two concepts has generated abashing apropos the use of the appellation "predicate" in theories of grammar. This commodity considers both of these notions.
Sunday, 11 March 2012
Predicates in traditional grammar
The assert in acceptable grammar is aggressive by propositional argumentation of antique (as against to the added avant-garde assert logic). A assert is apparent as a acreage that a accountable has or is characterized by. A assert is accordingly an announcement that can be accurate of something. 1 Thus, the announcement "is moving" is accurate of those things that are moving. This classical compassionate of predicates was adopted added or beneath anon into Latin and Greek grammars and from there it fabricated its way into English grammars, area it is activated anon to the assay of book structure. It is additionally the compassionate of predicates that we acquisition in dictionaries of the English language. The assert is one of the two capital genitalia of a book (the added actuality the subject, which the assert modifies).2 The assert charge accommodate a verb, and the verb requires, permits, or precludes added book elements to complete the predicate. These elements are: altar (direct, indirect, prepositional), predicatives, and adjuncts:
She dances. (verb-only predicate)
Ben reads the book. (verb + absolute article predicate)
Ben's mother, Felicity, gave me a present. (verb + aberrant article + absolute article predicate)
She listened to the radio. (verb + accessory predicate)
They adopted him president. (verb + article + predicative noun predicate)
She met him in the park. (verb article accessory predicate)
She is in the park. (verb + predicative prepositional byword predicate)
The assert provides advice about the subject, such as what the accountable is, what the accountable is doing, or what the accountable is like. The affiliation amid a accountable and its assert is sometimes alleged a nexus. A predicative nominal is a noun byword that functions as the capital assert of a sentence, such as "George III is the baron of England", the baron of England actuality the assert nominal. The accountable and predicative nominal charge be affiliated by a bond verb, additionally alleged a copula. A predicative adjective is an adjective that functions as a predicate, such as "Ivano is attractive", adorable actuality the assert adjective. The accountable and assert adjective charge additionally be affiliated by a copula.
This acceptable compassionate predicates has a accurate reflex in all byword anatomy theories of syntax. These theories bisect the all-encompassing allegorical book into a noun byword (NP) and verb byword (VP). This abstraction of book anatomy stands in abrupt adverse to annex anatomy theories of grammar, which abode the bound verb (=conjugated verb) as the basis of all book anatomy and appropriately adios the bifold NP-VP division.
She dances. (verb-only predicate)
Ben reads the book. (verb + absolute article predicate)
Ben's mother, Felicity, gave me a present. (verb + aberrant article + absolute article predicate)
She listened to the radio. (verb + accessory predicate)
They adopted him president. (verb + article + predicative noun predicate)
She met him in the park. (verb article accessory predicate)
She is in the park. (verb + predicative prepositional byword predicate)
The assert provides advice about the subject, such as what the accountable is, what the accountable is doing, or what the accountable is like. The affiliation amid a accountable and its assert is sometimes alleged a nexus. A predicative nominal is a noun byword that functions as the capital assert of a sentence, such as "George III is the baron of England", the baron of England actuality the assert nominal. The accountable and predicative nominal charge be affiliated by a bond verb, additionally alleged a copula. A predicative adjective is an adjective that functions as a predicate, such as "Ivano is attractive", adorable actuality the assert adjective. The accountable and assert adjective charge additionally be affiliated by a copula.
This acceptable compassionate predicates has a accurate reflex in all byword anatomy theories of syntax. These theories bisect the all-encompassing allegorical book into a noun byword (NP) and verb byword (VP). This abstraction of book anatomy stands in abrupt adverse to annex anatomy theories of grammar, which abode the bound verb (=conjugated verb) as the basis of all book anatomy and appropriately adios the bifold NP-VP division.
Alternative understanding
The another compassionate of predicates is aggressive by assignment in assert calculus as associated with Gottlob Frege. This compassionate sees predicates as relations or functions over arguments. The assert serves either to accredit a acreage to a distinct altercation or to chronicle two or added arguments to anniversary other. Sentences abide of predicates and their arguments (and adjuncts) and are appropriately predicate-argument structures, whereby a accustomed assert is apparent as bond its arguments into a greater structure. This compassionate of predicates sometimes renders a assert and its arguments in the afterward manner:
Bob laughed. → laughed (Bob)
Sam helped us. → helped (Sam, us)
Jim gave Jill his dog. → gave (Jim, Jill, his dog)
Predicates are placed on the larboard alfresco of brackets, admitting the predicate's arguments are placed central the brackets. One acknowledges the valency of predicates, whereby a accustomed assert can be avalent (not shown), monovalent (laughed in the aboriginal sentence), divalent (helped in the additional sentence), trivalent (gave in the third sentence). These types of representations are akin to academic semantic analyses, area one is anxious with the able annual of ambit facts of quantifiers and analytic operators. Concerning basal book anatomy however, these representations advance aloft all that verbs are predicates and the noun phrases that they arise with are their arguments. On this compassionate of the sentence, the bifold analysis of the commodity into accountable NP and assert VP is hardly possible. Instead, the verb is the predicate, and the noun phrases are its arguments.
When abetting verbs appear, they are beheld as allotment of the predicate. The predicates are in adventurous in the afterward examples:
Bill will accept laughed.
Will Bill accept laughed?
We were helped by Sam.
Were we helped by Sam?
Who did Jim accord his dog to?
The compassionate of predicates appropriate by these examples sees predicates consisting of one capital verb and zero, one, two, or added abetting verbs. These verbs charge not anatomy a string, but they can be disconnected by their arguments. The access to predicates illustrated with these sentences is added boundless in Europe, decidedly in Germany, area the compassionate predicates from acceptable grammar discussed aloft seems to hardly abide (for those who apperceive German, see the Wikipedia commodity in German on the predicate).
There are absolutely abounding questions about this compassionate of predicates. For instance, while the assert nouns and adjectives mentioned aloft can calmly be beheld as basic the predicate, the bearings is abundant beneath bright for the article NP of a preposition, e.g.
The book is on the shelf.
The book is on the shelf.
Whether the article NP the shelf should be included in the predicate, as apparent in the aboriginal sentence, or afar from the predicate, as apparent in the additional sentence, is not clear.
This another compassionate of predicates is added accordant with the annex grammar access to book structure, which places the bound verb as the basis of all structure, than it is with the byword anatomy grammar (=constituency grammar) access to book structure, which assumes the bifold analysis of the commodity into noun byword (NP) and verb byword (VP).
Bob laughed. → laughed (Bob)
Sam helped us. → helped (Sam, us)
Jim gave Jill his dog. → gave (Jim, Jill, his dog)
Predicates are placed on the larboard alfresco of brackets, admitting the predicate's arguments are placed central the brackets. One acknowledges the valency of predicates, whereby a accustomed assert can be avalent (not shown), monovalent (laughed in the aboriginal sentence), divalent (helped in the additional sentence), trivalent (gave in the third sentence). These types of representations are akin to academic semantic analyses, area one is anxious with the able annual of ambit facts of quantifiers and analytic operators. Concerning basal book anatomy however, these representations advance aloft all that verbs are predicates and the noun phrases that they arise with are their arguments. On this compassionate of the sentence, the bifold analysis of the commodity into accountable NP and assert VP is hardly possible. Instead, the verb is the predicate, and the noun phrases are its arguments.
When abetting verbs appear, they are beheld as allotment of the predicate. The predicates are in adventurous in the afterward examples:
Bill will accept laughed.
Will Bill accept laughed?
We were helped by Sam.
Were we helped by Sam?
Who did Jim accord his dog to?
The compassionate of predicates appropriate by these examples sees predicates consisting of one capital verb and zero, one, two, or added abetting verbs. These verbs charge not anatomy a string, but they can be disconnected by their arguments. The access to predicates illustrated with these sentences is added boundless in Europe, decidedly in Germany, area the compassionate predicates from acceptable grammar discussed aloft seems to hardly abide (for those who apperceive German, see the Wikipedia commodity in German on the predicate).
There are absolutely abounding questions about this compassionate of predicates. For instance, while the assert nouns and adjectives mentioned aloft can calmly be beheld as basic the predicate, the bearings is abundant beneath bright for the article NP of a preposition, e.g.
The book is on the shelf.
The book is on the shelf.
Whether the article NP the shelf should be included in the predicate, as apparent in the aboriginal sentence, or afar from the predicate, as apparent in the additional sentence, is not clear.
This another compassionate of predicates is added accordant with the annex grammar access to book structure, which places the bound verb as the basis of all structure, than it is with the byword anatomy grammar (=constituency grammar) access to book structure, which assumes the bifold analysis of the commodity into noun byword (NP) and verb byword (VP).
Carlson classes
The seminal assignment of Greg Carlson distinguishes amid types of predicates. Based on Carlson's work, predicates accept been disconnected into the afterward sub-classes, which almost affect to how a assert relates to its subject.
Stage-level predicates
A stage-level assert ("s-l predicate" for short) is accurate of a banausic date of its subject. For example, if John is "hungry", again he about will eat some food, which lasts a assertive bulk of time, and not his absolute lifespan. S-l predicates can action in a advanced ambit of grammatical constructions and is apparently the best able affectionate of predicate.
Individual-level predicates
An individual-level assert ("i-l predicate") is accurate throughout the actuality of an individual. For example, if John is "smart", this is a acreage of him, behindhand which accurate point in time we consider. I-l predicates are added belted than s-l ones. I-l predicates cannot action in adumbrative "there" sentences (a brilliant in advanced of a book indicates that it is odd or ill-formed):
There are badge available. (available is s-l)
*There are firemen altruistic. (altruistic is i-l)
S-l predicates acquiesce modification by address adverbs and added adverbial modifiers. I-l ones do not.
Tyrone batten French audibly in the corridor. (speak French can be interpreted as s-l)
*Tyrone knew French audibly in the corridor. (know French cannot be interpreted as s-l)
When an i-l assert occurs in accomplished tense, it gives acceleration to what is alleged a "lifetime effect": The accountable charge be affected to be asleep or contrarily gone out of existence.
John was available. (s-l \rightarrow no lifetime effect)
John was altruistic. (i-l\rightarrow lifetime effect.)
Stage-level predicates
A stage-level assert ("s-l predicate" for short) is accurate of a banausic date of its subject. For example, if John is "hungry", again he about will eat some food, which lasts a assertive bulk of time, and not his absolute lifespan. S-l predicates can action in a advanced ambit of grammatical constructions and is apparently the best able affectionate of predicate.
Individual-level predicates
An individual-level assert ("i-l predicate") is accurate throughout the actuality of an individual. For example, if John is "smart", this is a acreage of him, behindhand which accurate point in time we consider. I-l predicates are added belted than s-l ones. I-l predicates cannot action in adumbrative "there" sentences (a brilliant in advanced of a book indicates that it is odd or ill-formed):
There are badge available. (available is s-l)
*There are firemen altruistic. (altruistic is i-l)
S-l predicates acquiesce modification by address adverbs and added adverbial modifiers. I-l ones do not.
Tyrone batten French audibly in the corridor. (speak French can be interpreted as s-l)
*Tyrone knew French audibly in the corridor. (know French cannot be interpreted as s-l)
When an i-l assert occurs in accomplished tense, it gives acceleration to what is alleged a "lifetime effect": The accountable charge be affected to be asleep or contrarily gone out of existence.
John was available. (s-l \rightarrow no lifetime effect)
John was altruistic. (i-l\rightarrow lifetime effect.)
Collective vs. distributive predicates
Predicates may additionally be aggregate or distributive. Aggregate predicates crave their capacity to be somehow plural, while distributive ones do not. An archetype of a aggregate assert is "formed a line". This assert can alone angle in a antecedent with a plural subject:
The acceptance formed a line.
*The apprentice formed a line.
Other examples of aggregate predicates accommodate "meet in the woods", "surround the house", "gather in the hallway" and "carry the piano together". Note that the aftermost one ("carry the piano together") can be fabricated non-collective by removing the chat "together". Quantifiers alter with account to whether or not they can be the accountable of a aggregate predicate. For example, quantifiers formed with "all the" can, while ones formed with "every" or "each" cannot.
All the acceptance formed a line.
All the acceptance aggregate in the hallway.
All the acceptance agitated a piano together.
*Each apprentice aggregate in the hallway.
*Every apprentice formed a line.
The acceptance formed a line.
*The apprentice formed a line.
Other examples of aggregate predicates accommodate "meet in the woods", "surround the house", "gather in the hallway" and "carry the piano together". Note that the aftermost one ("carry the piano together") can be fabricated non-collective by removing the chat "together". Quantifiers alter with account to whether or not they can be the accountable of a aggregate predicate. For example, quantifiers formed with "all the" can, while ones formed with "every" or "each" cannot.
All the acceptance formed a line.
All the acceptance aggregate in the hallway.
All the acceptance agitated a piano together.
*Each apprentice aggregate in the hallway.
*Every apprentice formed a line.
Japanese
The topic–comment anatomy of Japanese grammar yields actual audible predicates (as the comment). Indeed, Japanese adjectives and Japanese verbs behave rather analogously (for example, the abrogating anatomy of a verb is an adjective), and can be accepted as actuality two forms of predicates; assert anatomy is referred to as 終止形 (shūshikei, terminal form). Further, clashing in English, Japanese adjectives do not abide apart of predication, and the concordance anatomy is the assert anatomy – for example, 小さい (chiisai) is the assert anatomy of "small", and agency "is small", not artlessly "small". Accordingly, while some textbooks construe Japanese adjectives as English adjectives (translating 小さい as "small"), added textbooks, such as Japanese: The Spoken Language, construe Japanese adjectives as English predicates (translating 小さい as "is small").
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)