In linguistics, inversion is any of several grammatical constructions where two expressions switch their typical or expected order of appearance, that is, they invert. There are several types of subject-verb inversion in English: locative inversion, directive inversion, copular inversion, and quotative inversion. The most frequent type of inversion in English is subject–auxiliary inversion in which an auxiliary verb changes places with its subject; it often occurs in questions, such as Are you coming?, with the subject you being switched with the auxiliary are. In many other languages, especially those with a freer word order than that of English, inversion can take place with a variety of verbs (not just auxiliaries) and with other syntactic categories as well.
When a layered constituency-based analysis of sentence structure is used, inversion often results in the discontinuity of a constituent, but that would not be the case with a flatter dependency-based analysis. In that regard, inversion has consequences similar to those of shifting.
A characteristic of Germanic languages, except modern English, which still has remnants of this principle, is that non-question sentences, including clauses that aren't themselves questions, have a V2 word order, meaning that the finite verb is the second syntactic constituent in the sentence or clause. This is observed as a subject-verb inversion whenever a preceding constituent displaces the subject from its regular position first in the sentence. However, an unprovoked subject-verb inversion, or what may be described as V1 word order, makes the sentence a question. As a special case, the question phrase becomes a non-question if used as a verb-first conditional clause, such as "Had I known …". The position of non-finite verbs, which differ between North and West Germanic languages, and English uses more of, do not take part in determining whether the sentence is a question. Neither do question words.
Syntax highlighting: In the following table, finite verbs are in red, non-finite verbs are in orange and subjects are blue. Whenever the subject and verb changes places (the inversion occurs), they are italicized. Words that cause the inversion are in green, whereas words that don't are in grey.
Verb position | Word order (BNF) | is a question | Example | English word for word translation | Modern English | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
V2 | SubjectVerb | No | Norwegian | jeger | Iam | |
German | ichbin | |||||
Independent-clause Question-wordSubjectVerb | N/A | Norwegian | … hvorjeger | … whereIam | ||
German | … woichbin | |||||
AdverbVerbSubject | No | Norwegian | derforerjeg | thereforeamI | therefore, Iam | |
German | deshalbbinich | |||||
Norwegian | aldriharjeg | neverhaveI | ||||
German | noch niehabeich | |||||
Norwegian | nåsnørdet | nowsnowsit | now, itissnowing | |||
German | jetztschneites | |||||
PrepositionVerbSubject | Norwegian | hererjeg | hereamI | here, Iam | ||
German | hierbinich | |||||
Norwegian | herkommersola | herecomesthe sun | ||||
German | hierkommtdie Sonne | |||||
ObjectVerbSubject | Icelandic | Þaðveitég | thatknowI | that, Iknow | ||
Norwegian | detvetjeg | |||||
Dutch | datweetik | |||||
German | dasweißich | |||||
V1 | VerbSubject | Yes | Norwegian | erjeg | amI | |
German | binich | |||||
Question-wordVerbSubject | Norwegian | hvorerjeg | whereamI | |||
German | wobinich | |||||
VerbSubjectQuestion-wordSubjectVerb | Norwegian | vetduhvorjeger | knowyouwhereIam | doyouknowwhereIam | ||
German | weißtdu, woichbin | |||||
VerbSubjectVerb Object VerbSubjectVerb Verb Object | No | Norwegian | haddejegvisst det, villejegha sagt det | hadIknown it, wouldIhave said it | hadIknown it, Iwouldhave said it | |
English uses subject-verb inversions less often than other Germanic languages. Broadly, a distinction can be made between auxiliary and full verbs. The auxiliary verbs undergo inversion in more cases than other verbs.
The default order in English is subject–verb (SV), but a number of meaning-related differences (such as those illustrated above) motivate the subject and auxiliary verb to invert so that the finite verb precedes the subject; one ends up with auxiliary–subject (Aux-S) order. That type of inversion fails if the finite verb is not an auxiliary:
(The star * is the symbol used in linguistics to indicate that the example is grammatically unacceptable.)
In languages like Italian, Spanish, Finnish, etc. subject-verb inversion is commonly seen with a wide range of verbs and does not require an element at the beginning of the sentence. See the following Italian example:
è
is
arrivato
arrived
Giovanni.
Giovanni
'Giovanni arrived'
In English, on the other hand, subject-verb inversion generally takes the form of a Locative inversion. A familiar example of subject-verb inversion from English is the presentational there construction.
There's a shark.
English (especially written English) also has an inversion construction involving a locative expression other than there ("in a little white house" in the following example):
In a little white house lived two rabbits. [1]
Contrary to the subject-auxiliary inversion, the verb in cases of subject–verb inversion in English is not required to be an auxiliary verb; it is, rather, a full verb or a form of the copula be. If the sentence has an auxiliary verb, the subject is placed after the auxiliary and the main verb. For example:
Since this type of inversion generally places the focus on the subject, the subject is likely to be a full noun or noun phrase rather than a pronoun. Third-person personal pronouns are especially unlikely to be found as the subject in this construction:
Certain other languages, like other Germanic languages and Romance languages, use inversion in ways broadly similar to English, such as in question formation. The restriction of inversion to auxiliary verbs does not generally apply in those languages; subjects can be inverted with any type of verb, but particular languages have their own rules and restrictions.
For example, French can form questions using verb-subject inversions like a Germanic language: tu aimes le chocolat is a declarative sentence meaning "you like the chocolate". When the order of the subject tu ("you") and the verb aimes ("like") is switched, a question is produced: aimes-tu le chocolat? ("do you like the chocolate?"). Compare with Norwegian: du liker means "you like", whereas liker du would mean "do you like". Note that English obeys the same rule despite its use of the auxiliary word "do": It is the position of the finite verb that determines whether the sentence is a question, and the auxiliary verb takes that place.
In languages with free word order, inversion of subject and verb or of other elements of a clause can occur more freely, often for pragmatic reasons rather than as part of a specific grammatical construction.
Locative inversion is a common linguistic phenomenon that has been studied by linguists of various theoretical backgrounds.
In multiple Bantu languages, such as Chichewa, [2] the locative and subject arguments of certain verbs can be inverted without changing the semantic roles of those arguments, similar to the English subject-verb inversion examples above. Below are examples from Zulu, [3] where the numbers indicate noun classes, SBJ = subject agreement prefix, APPL = applicative suffix, FV = final vowel in Bantu verbal morphology, and LOC is the locative circumfix for adjuncts.
A-bantwana
2-2.child
ba-fund-el-a
2.SBJ-study-APPL-FV
e-sikole-ni.
LOC:7-7.school-LOC
"The children study at the school."
I-sikole
7-7.school
si-fund-el-a
7.SBJ-study-APPL-FV
a-bantwana.
2-2.child
"The children study at the school." (lit. "The school studies the children.")
In the locative inversion example, isikole, "school" acts as the subject of the sentence while semantically remaining a locative argument rather than a subject/agent one. Moreover, we can see that it is able to trigger subject-verb agreement as well, further indicating that it is the syntactic subject of the sentence.
This is in contrast to examples of locative inversion in English, where the semantic subject of the sentence controls subject-verb agreement, implying that it is a dislocated syntactic subject as well:
In the English examples, the verb roll agrees in number with cars, implying that the latter is still the syntactic subject of the sentence, despite being in a noncanonical subject position. However, in the Zulu example of locative inversion, it is the noun isikole, "school" that controls subject-verb agreement, despite not being the semantic subject of the sentence.
Locative inversion is observed in Mandarin Chinese. Consider the following sentences:
Gǎngshào
Sentry
zhàn
stand
zài
at
ménkǒu.
door
'At the entrance stands a/the sentry'
In canonical word order, the subject (gǎngshào 'sentry') appears before the verb and the locative expression (ménkǒu 'door') after the verb. In Locative inversion, the two expressions switch the order of appearance: it is the locative that appears before the verb while the subject occurs in postverbal position. In Chinese, as in many other languages, the inverted word order carry a presentational function, that is, it is used to introduce new entities into discourse. [5]
Syntactic inversion has played an important role in the history of linguistic theory because of the way it interacts with question formation and topic and focus constructions. The particular analysis of inversion can vary greatly depending on the theory of syntax that one pursues. One prominent type of analysis is in terms of movement in transformational phrase structure grammars. [6] Since those grammars tend to assume layered structures that acknowledge a finite verb phrase (VP) constituent, they need movement to overcome what would otherwise be a discontinuity. In dependency grammars, by contrast, sentence structure is less layered (in part because a finite VP constituent is absent), which means that simple cases of inversion do not involve a discontinuity; [7] the dependent simply appears on the other side of its head. The two competing analyses are illustrated with the following trees:
The two trees on the left illustrate the movement analysis of subject-auxiliary inversion in a constituency-based theory; a BPS-style (bare phrase structure) representational format is employed, where the words themselves are used as labels for the nodes in the tree. The finite verb will is seen moving out of its base position into a derived position at the front of the clause. The trees on the right show the contrasting dependency-based analysis. The flatter structure, which lacks a finite VP constituent, does not require an analysis in terms of movement but the dependent Fred simply appears on the other side of its head Will.
Pragmatic analyses of inversion generally emphasize the information status of the two noncanonically-positioned phrases – that is, the degree to which the switched phrases constitute given or familiar information vs. new or informative information. Birner (1996), for example, draws on a corpus study of naturally-occurring inversions to show that the initial preposed constituent must be at least as familiar within the discourse (in the sense of Prince 1992) as the final postposed constituent – which in turn suggests that inversion serves to help the speaker maintain a given-before-new ordering of information within the sentence. In later work, Birner (2018) argues that passivization and inversion are variants, or alloforms, of a single argument-reversing construction that, in turn, serves in a given instance as either a variant of a more general preposing construction or a more general postposing construction.
The overriding function of inverted sentences (including locative inversion) is presentational: the construction is typically used either to introduce a discourse-new referent or to introduce an event which in turn involves a referent which is discourse-new. The entity thus introduced will serve as the topic of the subsequent discourse. [8] Consider the following spoken Chinese example:
Zhènghǎo
Just
tóuli
ahead
guò-lai
pass-come
yí
one-CL
lǎotóur,
old-man
'Right then came over an old man.'
zhè
this
lǎotóur,
old.man
tā
3S
zhàn-zhe
stand-DUR
hái
still
bù
not
dònghuó
move
'this old man, he was standing without moving.' [9]
The constituent yí lǎotóur "an old man" is introduced for the first time into discourse in post-verbal position. Once it is introduced by the presentational inverted structure, it can be coded by the proximal demonstrative pronoun zhè 'this' and then by the personal pronoun tā – denoting an accessible referent: a referent that is already present in speakers' consciousness.
In linguistics, syntax is the study of how words and morphemes combine to form larger units such as phrases and sentences. Central concerns of syntax include word order, grammatical relations, hierarchical sentence structure (constituency), agreement, the nature of crosslinguistic variation, and the relationship between form and meaning (semantics). Diverse approaches, such as generative grammar and functional grammar, offer unique perspectives on syntax, reflecting its complexity and centrality to understanding human language.
In grammar, a phrase—called expression in some contexts—is a group of words or singular word acting as a grammatical unit. For instance, the English expression "the very happy squirrel" is a noun phrase which contains the adjective phrase "very happy". Phrases can consist of a single word or a complete sentence. In theoretical linguistics, phrases are often analyzed as units of syntactic structure such as a constituent. There is a difference between the common use of the term phrase and its technical use in linguistics. In common usage, a phrase is usually a group of words with some special idiomatic meaning or other significance, such as "all rights reserved", "economical with the truth", "kick the bucket", and the like. It may be a euphemism, a saying or proverb, a fixed expression, a figure of speech, etc.. In linguistics, these are known as phrasemes.
English grammar is the set of structural rules of the English language. This includes the structure of words, phrases, clauses, sentences, and whole texts.
An auxiliary verb is a verb that adds functional or grammatical meaning to the clause in which it occurs, so as to express tense, aspect, modality, voice, emphasis, etc. Auxiliary verbs usually accompany an infinitive verb or a participle, which respectively provide the main semantic content of the clause. An example is the verb have in the sentence I have finished my lunch. Here, the auxiliary have helps to express the perfect aspect along with the participle, finished. Some sentences contain a chain of two or more auxiliary verbs. Auxiliary verbs are also called helping verbs, helper verbs, or (verbal) auxiliaries. Research has been conducted into split inflection in auxiliary verbs.
In language, a clause is a constituent or phrase that comprises a semantic predicand and a semantic predicate. A typical clause consists of a subject and a syntactic predicate, the latter typically a verb phrase composed of a verb with or without any objects and other modifiers. However, the subject is sometimes unexpressed if it is easily deducible from the context, especially in null-subject language but also in other languages, including instances of the imperative mood in English.
In linguistics, a verb phrase (VP) is a syntactic unit composed of a verb and its arguments except the subject of an independent clause or coordinate clause. Thus, in the sentence A fat man quickly put the money into the box, the words quickly put the money into the box constitute a verb phrase; it consists of the verb put and its arguments, but not the subject a fat man. A verb phrase is similar to what is considered a predicate in traditional grammars.
A subject is one of the two main parts of a sentence.
In linguistics, word order is the order of the syntactic constituents of a language. Word order typology studies it from a cross-linguistic perspective, and examines how languages employ different orders. Correlations between orders found in different syntactic sub-domains are also of interest. The primary word orders that are of interest are
In syntax, verb-second (V2) word order is a sentence structure in which the finite verb of a sentence or a clause is placed in the clause's second position, so that the verb is preceded by a single word or group of words.
In generative grammar, non-configurational languages are languages characterized by a flat phrase structure, which allows syntactically discontinuous expressions, and a relatively free word order.
In linguistics, a small clause consists of a subject and its predicate, but lacks an overt expression of tense. Small clauses have the semantic subject-predicate characteristics of a clause, and have some, but not all, properties of a constituent. Structural analyses of small clauses vary according to whether a flat or layered analysis is pursued. The small clause is related to the phenomena of raising-to-object, exceptional case-marking, accusativus cum infinitivo, and object control.
In linguistics, volition is a concept that distinguishes whether the subject, or agent of a particular sentence intended an action or not. Simply, it is the intentional or unintentional nature of an action. Volition concerns the idea of control and for the purposes outside of psychology and cognitive science, is considered the same as intention in linguistics. Volition can then be expressed in a given language using a variety of possible methods. These sentence forms usually indicate that a given action has been done intentionally, or willingly. There are various ways of marking volition cross-linguistically. When using verbs of volition in English, like "want" or "prefer", these verbs are not expressly marked. Other languages handle this with affixes, while others have complex structural consequences of volitional or non-volitional encoding.
In linguistics, inverse copular constructions, named after Moro (1997), are a type of inversion in English where canonical SCP word order is reversed in a sense, so that one appears to have the order PCS instead. The verb in these constructions is always the copula be. Inverse copular constructions are intriguing because they render the distinction between subject and predicative expression difficult to maintain. The confusion has led to focused study of these constructions, and their impact on the theory of grammar may be great since they appear to challenge the initial binary division of the sentence (S) into a subject noun phrase (NP) and a predicate verb phrase (VP), this division being at the core of all phrase structure grammars.
Subject–auxiliary inversion is a frequently occurring type of inversion in the English language whereby a finite auxiliary verb – taken here to include finite forms of the copula be – appears to "invert" with the subject. The word order is therefore Aux-S (auxiliary–subject), which is the opposite of the canonical SV (subject–verb) order of declarative clauses in English. The most frequent use of subject–auxiliary inversion in English is in the formation of questions, although it also has other uses, including the formation of condition clauses, and in the syntax of sentences beginning with negative expressions.
Syntactic movement is the means by which some theories of syntax address discontinuities. Movement was first postulated by structuralist linguists who expressed it in terms of discontinuous constituents or displacement. Some constituents appear to have been displaced from the position in which they receive important features of interpretation. The concept of movement is controversial and is associated with so-called transformational or derivational theories of syntax. Representational theories, in contrast, reject the notion of movement and often instead address discontinuities with other mechanisms including graph reentrancies, feature passing, and type shifters.
Do-support, in English grammar, is the use of the auxiliary verb do, to form negated clauses and constructions which require subject–auxiliary inversion, such as questions.
This article describes the syntax of clauses in the English language, chiefly in Modern English. A clause is often said to be the smallest grammatical unit that can express a complete proposition. But this semantic idea of a clause leaves out much of English clause syntax. For example, clauses can be questions, but questions are not propositions. A syntactic description of an English clause is that it is a subject and a verb. But this too fails, as a clause need not have a subject, as with the imperative, and, in many theories, an English clause may be verbless. The idea of what qualifies varies between theories and has changed over time.
Subject–verb inversion in English is a type of inversion marked by a predicate verb that precedes a corresponding subject, e.g., "Beside the bed stood a lamp". Subject–verb inversion is distinct from subject–auxiliary inversion because the verb involved is not an auxiliary verb.
Betty J. Birner is an American linguist. Her research focuses on pragmatics and discourse analysis, particularly the identification of the types of contexts appropriate for sentences with marked word order.
An echo question is a question that seeks to confirm or clarify another speaker's utterance, by repeating it back in some form. For example:
A: I'm moving to Greenland. B: You're moving where?