verb phrases

Question

Hi, I wan't to analyse the verb phrases in the following sentence:

"A feature is likely to be added if it proves to be useful."

"is likely to be added" are two verb phrases:
1. "is likely to" as (semi-) auxiliary and "be" as main verb, and
2. "added" as main verb of the second verb phrase

or is this only one verb phrase with "be" as another auxiliary?

In the second part "proves to be" is the same right?

proves to = main verb
be = main verb

am I right or do I get something wrong here?

Thanxs for your answers!

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

"A feature is likely to be added if it proves to be useful."

Most systems would classify the verb in the main clause as "is"
The verb in the infinitive clause "to be added" is passive voice; this clause is a complement of the adjective "likely."

In the dependent clause, the main verb is "proves." Prove is a catenative verb; it is followed by the infinitive clause "to be useful" (generally classified as object)

RandomGuy · Answer

Anonymous"is likely to" as (semi-) auxiliary and "be" as main verb, and

The sequence is likely to is not an auxiliary, not a syntactic unit of any sort, in fact, and neither is proves to.

All of the verbs in your sentence are main verbs in that they are all heads of their respective clauses:

main clause: A feature is likely to be added if it proves to be useful.
to-infinitival clause: to be added
past participial clause: added
bare content clause: it proves to be useful
to-infinitival clause: to be useful

Anonymous · Answer

Thanx for your quick answer.

Just to confirm I got it right:

The primary verb "is" functions as one verb phrase and " to be added" as a second verb phrase with "to be" as auxiliary and "added" as main verb?

I got mistaken because I read that "be likely to" functions as semi-auxiliary.
In which case would it be a semi- auxiliary?

AlpheccaStars · Answer

AnonymousI got mistaken because I read that "be likely to" functions as semi-auxiliary.

Where (what book) did you read this in?

RandomGuy · Answer

AnonymousThe primary verb "is" functions as one verb phrase

No, it functions as head of the VP is likely to be added if it proves to be useful, and ultimately of the main clause.

Anonymousand " to be added" as a second verb phrase with "to be" as auxiliary and "added" as main verb?

Be (not to be) is an auxiliary, yes, but it is just as much a main verb as added is. To be added consists of two VPs (and on a higher level two clauses): be added, in which be is head (or 'the main verb') and added is complement, and added, where added is head (or 'the main verb').

AnonymousIn which case would it be a semi- auxiliary?

Never. Be likely to is not a verb, only a fragment of the sentence. Be is a verb, likely is an adjective, and to is an infinitival subordinator that introduces the following VP. They are not a constituent.

CalifJim · Answer

Aspara Gusbare content clause

Wow! Now that's a combination of words that is not seen much. Google actually has a total of (Count 'em.) four hits!

I get it with I know Bubba is crazy, and I've seen the terms "that content clause" and "whether content clause", so why not an "if content clause" here?

Secondly, wouldn't every complete sentence be a bare content clause? (The sun rises in the east. vs Even the ancients knew the sun rises in the east.)

CJ

RandomGuy · Answer

CalifJimWow! Now that's a combination of words that is not seen much. Google actually has a total of (Count 'em.) four hits!

So?

CalifJimwhy not an "if content clause" here?

If isn’t part of the clause; it’s head of the phrase containing it, whereas in, say, I don’t know if I can make it the meaningless subordinator if is part of the subordinate clause it introduces.

CalifJimwouldn't every complete sentence be a bare content clause?

Of course not. The term ‘content clause’ applies only to subordinate clauses. The sun rises in the east is a declarative main clause, and the subordinate clause in Even the ancients knew the sun rises in the east is a declarative content clause. You know this.

CalifJim · Answer

Aspara Guswhereas in, say, I don’t know if I can make it the meaningless subordinator if is part of the subordinate clause it introduces.

OK. I thought that was it.

But with regard to the if— 'meaningless'?

Aspara GusThe term ‘content clause’ applies only to main clauses.

What? I'm lost now. I know they have a son. The underlined segment of the preceding sentence must be a main clause then, because it's a content clause, and you say that 'content clause' applies only to main clauses.

Hmmm. I always thought it was considered a subordinate clause.

Aspara GusYou know this.

You are being too generous. I know it so poorly that I can't even follow your logic (above).

CJ

RandomGuy · Answer

CalifJimBut with regard to the if— 'meaningless'?

Pretty much. It’s more a marker of subordination than anything else.

Aspara GusThe term ‘content clause’ applies only to main clauses.

Yeah, that was supposed to be “subordinate clauses”. I’ll edit it.
Tired.

CalifJimI know it so poorly that I can't even follow your logic

CalifJim · Answer

Aspara Gusthat was supposed to be “subordinate clauses”

Oh, good. Now it makes sense.

Believe it or not, when those kinds of errors occur, I seriously don't know if they ARE errors or just something else bizarre about the latest theories of grammar.

When I thought it was an error to say that "when" is a preposition, it turns out I was wrong, so it's just as likely that I was wrong to think it was an error to say that 'content clause' applies only to main clauses.

CJ

verb phrases

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions