Nonfinites. Inflectional forms or syntactic categories?

Question

Welcome to Everyone!I am a college student from Hungary and I really need your help with my homework.Here is the thing.Some grammars assume that nonfinites (infinitives, gerunds and participles) are inflectional forms  of the English verb -&gt; they are all verbs.Some grammars also assume that they are not inflectional forms but they belong to totally  different syntactical categories.These two assumptions lead to a contradiction and the grammar cannot contain both of them.The question is:Which assumption do you think should be abandoned? Why?Thank you for your opinion in advance!

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

Since it is your homework, you should make an effort to formulate some ideas yourself.  Post them here in essay form and we will review them.

Anonymous · Answer

I know it is my homework but my linguistic teacher is not a very good one and I barely understand anything.

Anyway I have just finished my essay. It is 1 am now and I am dead. I have to hand it in at 11.30 am. I would be very happy if anyone could comment on my paper. Any feedback is welcomed I will have some time in the morning to make corrections. Unfortunately I do not think my essay makes any sense.

Or does it?

And sorry for my English but I am not a native.

The syntactic category of nonfinite verbal forms and expressions in traditional grammar

Traditional English Grammar holds two such assumptions about the nonfinites (infinitives, gerunds and particles) which assumptions are mutually contradictory. One of these assumptions (a) claims that gerunds, particles and infinitives are (nonfinite) inflectional forms of the English verb. The other assumption (b) states that the nonfinites have nothing to do with verbs since they constitute separate syntactic categories. These categories are: Infinitive, Gerund and Participle, collectively called „verbals”. A grammar cannot hold such a contradiction and for this reason a solution for this problem should be found.

Nonfinites are inflectional forms of the English verb and inflectional forms are alternative grammatical realizations of an element of a particular category. It means that nonfinites belong to the same syntactical category. In this case nonfinites are the inflectional forms of verbs and they belong to the same syntactic category of the Verb.
Here is one example:

(1) My pen is on the desk.

(2) My pens are on the desk.

Here the word ’pen’ is inflected. In sentence (1) pen is in the singular, in sentence (2) it is in the plural still they counts as the same lexical item („word”) PEN. It does not matter whether a word is in the singular or in the plural they belong to the same syntactic category: pen, pens, PEN is the same: Noun.

This assumption is supported by two facts which say that the nonfinites a, look very much like verbs and that the they b, share important syntactic properties with each other and with verbs.

For example:

a, read – to read – reading There is not so much visible difference.

b, The verb “give” is a ditransitive verb which means that it takes two objects. It does not matter whether the infinitive “to give” or the gerund “giving” is used in a sentence, they also must take two objects.

1, I gave him a book. object 1: him object 2: a book

2, Giving him a book was easy. object 1: him object 2: a book

3, I was said to give him a book. object 1: him object 2: a book

According to the latter assumption verbals are not inflectional forms of the Verb but they belong to different grammatical categories. The basis of this assumption is that there is a difference in the distribution of VPs and “InfPs” and “GerPs” is different. a, VPs cannot get in subject position in sentences but InfPs and GerPs can and b, VPs cannot take the position of the object while InfPs and GerPs can. This is a very important observation.

For example:

a, 1, Read the book was fun. This sentence is grammatically incorrect.

2, Reading the book was fun.

3, To read the book was fun.

b, 1, I loved read the book. This is a grammatically incorrect sentence.

2, I loved reading the book.

3, I want to read the book.

However, it does not matter that both assumptions have support they still contradict each other. Nonfinites cannot be both Verbs and Verbals at the same time. This contradiction leads to the realisation that there is something wrong here. As a result of this failure some experts did some researches and they pointed out that the problem here is with one of the underlying assumptions. Both assumptions rely on some fundamental assumptions about what lexical units and categories are; what an inflection is; what a phrase is; what a sentence is; and what the constituent structure of a sentence is. If we would like to solve the problem we should investigate the assumptions about these terms.

First, take the lexical unit. A lexical unit or item (“word”) is a “form-meaning composite that represents a lexical form”. It comes in alternative grammatical realisation. This assumption is accaptable.

Second, the lexical category of a lexical unit refers to the type of the word. Lexical categories are mutually exclusive. A word that is a verb cannot be a noun or an adjective at the same time. This assumption is OK.

Third, the inflection is the modification of a word to express different grammatical categories but which does not change the syntactic category of that word.

Fourth, a phrase is a group of words which forms a constituent and so functions as a single unit. One of the words is the head of the group and the phrase is named after that particular word. à Vs head VPs and Vals head ValPs. There is no problem with this assumption.

Finally, traditional Grammar holds about a “sentence” that it expresses a complex thought, its subject is in the Nominative case, its verb must agree with the subject, that a sentence is marked for tense, it has an internal constituent structure (subject + predicate) and as the previous condition implies it has a subject. However, except for the last two conditions each condition should be removed since they are just conceptual barriers. Removing all the unnecessary conditions, we can say that any expression that must have a subject in a subject + predicate structure is a sentence.

Since these redundant conditions are removed it appears that the subject of a sentence may be in the Nominative or in the Accusative case, the subject either agree or not agree with the number or person of the verb, the sentence may or may not be marked for tense. These assumptions leads to another assumption about sentences: they may be finite or nonfinite.

The consequence of these findings is that all the contradictions disappear. Infinitives look like verbs because they are verbs, infinitival expressions are like ordinary verb phrases because they are VPs, O + OC structures look like sentences because they are sentences.

Mister Micawber · Answer

I have nothing to say about the validity of your arguments, Anon. I have simply fixed the grammar and polished some of the expressions and formatting for you:

Traditional English grammar holds two contradictory assumptions about the nonfinites (infinitives, gerunds and particles). One of these assumptions claims that gerunds, particles and infinitives are (nonfinite) inflectional forms of the English verb. The other assumption states that the nonfinites have nothing to do with verbs since they constitute separate syntactic categories. These categories are: infinitive, gerund and participle, collectively called "verbals". A grammar cannot hold such a contradiction, and for this reason a solution for this problem should be found.

Nonfinites are inflectional forms of the English verb, and inflectional forms are alternative grammatical realizations of an element of a particular category; therefore nonfinites belong to the same syntactical category. In this case nonfinites are the inflectional forms of verbs and they belong to the same syntactic category: verbs.

Here is one example:

(1) My pen is on the desk.

(2) My pens are on the desk.

Here the word ’pen’ is inflected. In sentence (1) pen is in the singular, and in sentence (2) it is in the plural; still they count as the same lexical item ("word”) PEN. It does not matter whether PEN is in the singular or in the plural: both forms belong to the same syntactic category: nouns. This assumption is supported by two facts which say that the nonfinites (a) look very much like verbs, and that they (b) share important syntactic properties with each other and with verbs.

For example:

(a) Give—to give—giving: There is a clear structural similarity: all contain the root 'read'.

(b) The verb “give” is a ditransitive verb, which means that it takes two objects. It does not matter whether the infinitive “to give” or the gerund “giving” is used in a sentence, they also must take two objects.

(1) I gave him a book. object 1: him object 2: a book

(2) Giving him a book was easy. object 1: him object 2: a book

(3) I was told to give him a book. object 1: him object 2: a book

According to the second assumption, verbals are not inflectional forms of the verb but belong to different grammatical categories. The basis of this assumption is that there is a difference in the distribution of verb phrases (VPs), infinitive phrases (InfPs) and gerundial phrases (GerPs): (a) VPs cannot appear in subject position in sentences while InfPs and GerPs can, and (b) VPs cannot take the position of object while InfPs and GerPs can. This is a very important observation.

For example:

(a) 1. (X) Read the book was fun. This sentence is grammatically incorrect.

2. Reading the book was fun.

3. To read the book was fun.

(b) 1. (X) I loved read the book. This is a grammatically incorrect sentence.

2. I loved reading the book.

3. I want to read the book.

However, even though both assumptions have support, they contradict each other. Nonfinites cannot be both verbs and verbals at the same time. Examining this contradiction, some experts have pointed out that the problem here is with one of the underlying assumptions. Both assumptions rely on some fundamental concepts about what lexical units and categories are, what an inflection is, what a phrase is, what a sentence is, and what the constituent structure of a sentence is. To solve the problem we should investigate the presumptions about these terms.

First, a lexical unit or item (“word”) is a “form-meaning composite”appearing in alternative grammatical realisations. Second, the lexical category of a lexical unit refers to the type of the word, and lexical categories are mutually exclusive: a word that is a verb cannot be a noun or an adjective at the same time. Third, inflection is the modification of a word to express different grammatical categories without changing the syntactic category of that word. Fourth, a phrase is a group of words which form a constituent and so function as a single unit. One of the words is the head of the group and the phrase is named after that particular word: Vs head VPs and Vals head ValPs. There is no problem with any of these four concepts.

Finally, traditional grammar holds that a “sentence” expresses a complex thought, it has a subject in the nominative case, its verb must agree with its subject, it is marked for tense, and it has an internal constituent structure (subject + predicate). However, the first three conditions are actually just conceptual barriers. Removing all the unnecessary conditions, we can say that any expression that has a subject in a subject + predicate structure is a sentence.

With these redundant conditions removed, the subject of a sentence may be in the nominative or accusative case, the subject may either agree or disagree with the number or person of the verb, and/or the sentence may or may not be marked for tense. These assumptions leads to another assumption about sentences: they may be finite or nonfinite.

The consequence of these findings is that all the previously mentioned contradictions disappear. Infinitives look like verbs because they are verbs, infinitival expressions are like ordinary verb phrases because they are VPs, and O + OC structures look like sentences because they are sentences.

Anonymous · Answer

Dear Mister Micawber,

thank you very much for your help!

I have to leave now and go to the college to give my paper to my teacher. I hope I will pass the course.

I wish you all the best!

Mister Micawber · Answer

Good luck.  Let us know your results.

Anonymous · Answer

Well, I got my result. In Hungary we have grades 1-5 and 5 is the best. I got a 4 for my paper.

I think it is a quiet good grade considering that my syntax/linguistics teacher is very critical and nothing is good enough for him.

Mister Micawber, thank you again!

Nonfinites. Inflectional forms or syntactic categories?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions