0
Surfer Posted 11 years ago
Grammar

auxiliary / subject inversion

Hello, everyone, ..

The following sentence is supposed to be an example on auxiliary / subject inversion:

France is is a founder member of the EU, as is Belgium.

Source:http://random-idea-english.blogspot.com/2014/11/inversion-with-so-such-and-as-exercises.html

as is Belgium is the inverted construct alright, but it's not of the auxiliary / subject variant of inversion: it's verb / suject inversion because is there is a main verb (Originally: Belgium is a a founder member of the EU), right?
  

Top answer

Yes.

— Fivejedjon

  • Yes.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

7 Answers
0
Surferit's not of the auxiliary / subject variant of inversion: it's verb / suject inversion because is there is a main verb
Yes, but some recent grammars call "is" an auxiliary there even though it is a linking verb, so I'm not surprised if someone claims that this, too, is subject-auxiliary inversion.

CJ
0
0
CalifJim Yes, but some recent grammars call "is" an auxiliary there even though it is a linking verb, so I'm not surprised if someone claims that this, too, is subject-auxiliary inversion.CJ
Thanks, CJ. But then according to those, what is the main verb in that case?

With other verbs (other than the verb to be),
0
0
SurferBut then according to those, what is the main verb in that case?
There is none in that case.
SurferI've never at least seen such a thing: is = does be??
You've never seen it because "does be" doesn't exist in English. The argument made by some grammarians is that "be" doesn't take the auxiliary "do" because "be" is al
0
0
Hi, ..

This one also is claimed to depict subject-auxiliary inversion:
Fred fell asleep, and so did Jim.

Is it the same case as above, or this one really merits its said definition?

Thanks.
0
0
SurferThis one also is claimed to depict subject-auxiliary inversion:Fred fell asleep, and so did Jim.
Yes. That's another case of subject-auxiliary inversion.

The idea is that some form of "do" occurs with all verbs that don't have any other auxiliary. Thus, the underlying form of "Gary lost his keys" is "Gary did lose his keys". We transform the
0

Related Questions