Stative verb

Last updated

According to some linguistics theories, a stative verb is a verb that describes a state of being, in contrast to a dynamic verb, which describes an action. The difference can be categorized by saying that stative verbs describe situations that are static, or unchanging throughout their entire duration, whereas dynamic verbs describe processes that entail change over time. [1] Many languages distinguish between these two types in terms of how they can be used grammatically. [2]

Contents

Contrast to dynamic

Some languages use the same verbs for dynamic and stative situations, and others use different (but often related) verbs with some kind of qualifiers to distinguish between them. Some verbs may act as either stative or dynamic. A phrase like "he plays the piano" may be either stative or dynamic, according to the context. When, in a given context, the verb "play" relates to a state (an interest or a profession), he could be an amateur who enjoys music or a professional pianist. The dynamic interpretation emerges from a specific context in the case "play" describes an action, "what does he do on Friday evening? He plays the piano".

The distinction between stative and dynamic verbs can be correlated with:

Progressive aspect

In English and certain other languages, stative and dynamic verbs differ in whether or not they typically occur in a progressive form. Dynamic verbs such as "go" can be used in the progressive (I am going to school) whereas stative verbs such as "know" cannot (*I am knowing the answer). A verb that has both dynamic and stative uses cannot normally be used in the progressive when a stative meaning is intended: e.g. one cannot normally say, idiomatically, "Every morning, I am going to school". In other languages, statives can be used in the progressive as well: in Korean, for example, the sentence 미나가 인호를 사랑하고 있다 (Mina is loving Inho) is perfectly valid. [3]

Morphological markers

In some languages, stative and dynamic verbs will use entirely different morphological markers on the verbs themselves. For example, in the Mantauran dialect of Rukai, an indigenous language of Taiwan, the two types of verbs take different prefixes in their finite forms, with dynamic verbs taking o- and stative verbs taking ma-. Thus, the dynamic verb "jump" is o-coroko in the active voice, while the stative verb "love" is ma-ðalamə. This sort of marking is characteristic of other Formosan languages as well. [4]

Difference from inchoative

In English, a verb that expresses a state can also express the entrance into a state. This is called inchoative aspect. The simple past is sometimes inchoative. For example, the present-tense verb in the sentence "He understands his friend" is stative, while the past-tense verb in the sentence "Suddenly he understood what she said" is inchoative, because it means that he understood henceforth. On the other hand, the past-tense verb in "At one time, he understood her" is stative.

The only way the difference between stative and inchoative can be expressed in English is through the use of modifiers, as in the above examples ("suddenly" and "at one time").

Likewise, in ancient Greek, a verb that expresses a state (e.g., ebasíleuon 'I was king') may use the aorist to express entrance into the state (e.g., ebasíleusa 'I became king'). But the aorist can also simply express the state as a whole, with no focus on the beginning of the state (eíkosi étē ebasíleusa 'I ruled for twenty years').

Formal definitions

In some theories of formal semantics, including David Dowty's, stative verbs have a logical form that is the lambda expression

Apart from Dowty, Z. Vendler and C. S. Smith [5] have also written influential work on aspectual classification of verbs.

English

Dowty's analysis

Dowty gives several tests to decide whether an English verb is stative. [6] They are as follows:

  1. Statives do not occur in the progressive:
    • John is running. (non-stative)
    • *John is knowing the answer.
  2. They cannot be complements of "force":
    • I forced John to run.
    • *I forced John to know the answer.
  3. They do not occur as imperatives, except when used in an inchoative manner.
    • Run!
    • *Know the answer!
    • Know thyself! (inchoative, not stative; archaic)
  4. They cannot appear in the pseudo-cleft construction :
    • What John did was run.
    • *What John did was know the answer.

Categories

Stative verbs are often divided into sub-categories, based on their semantics or syntax.

Semantic divisions mainly involve verbs that express someone's state of mind, or something's properties (of course, things can also be expressed via other language mechanisms as well, particularly adjectives). The precise categories vary by linguist. Huddleston and Pullum, for example, divide stative verbs into the following semantic categories: verbs of perception and sensation (see, hear), verbs of hurting (ache, itch), stance verbs (stand, sit), and verbs of cognition, emotion, and sensation (believe, regret). [7] Novakov, meanwhile, uses the slightly different categories: verbs denoting sensations (feel, hear), verbs denoting reasoning and mental attitude (believe, understand), verbs denoting positions/stance (lie, surround), and verbs denoting relations (resemble, contain). [8]

Syntactic divisions involve the types of clause structures in which a verb may be used. In the following examples, an asterisk (*) indicates that the sentence is ungrammatical:

John believes in Fido barking.
John believes Fido to bark.
Joan depends on Fido barking.
*Joan depends Fido to bark.
*Jim loathes on Fido barking.
*Jim loathes Fido to bark.

See also

Related Research Articles

In grammar, tense is a category that expresses time reference. Tenses are usually manifested by the use of specific forms of verbs, particularly in their conjugation patterns.

In linguistics, aspect is a grammatical category that expresses how a verbal action, event, or state, extends over time. For instance, perfective aspect is used in referring to an event conceived as bounded and unitary, without reference to any flow of time during the event. Imperfective aspect is used for situations conceived as existing continuously or habitually as time flows.

Infinitive is a linguistics term for certain verb forms existing in many languages, most often used as non-finite verbs. As with many linguistic concepts, there is not a single definition applicable to all languages. The name is derived from Late Latin [modus] infinitivus, a derivative of infinitus meaning "unlimited".

Lexical semantics, as a subfield of linguistic semantics, is the study of word meanings. It includes the study of how words structure their meaning, how they act in grammar and compositionality, and the relationships between the distinct senses and uses of a word.

In general linguistics, a labile verb is a verb that undergoes causative alternation; that is, it can be used both transitively and intransitively, with the requirement that the direct object of its transitive use corresponds to the subject of its intransitive use, as in "I ring the bell" and "The bell rings." Labile verbs are a prominent feature of English, and also occur in many other languages. When causatively alternating verbs are used transitively they are called causatives since, in the transitive use of the verb, the subject is causing the action denoted by the intransitive version. When causatively alternating verbs are used intransitively, they are referred to as anticausatives or inchoatives because the intransitive variant describes a situation in which the theme participant undergoes a change of state, becoming, for example, "rung".

In grammar, a future tense is a verb form that generally marks the event described by the verb as not having happened yet, but expected to happen in the future. An example of a future tense form is the French aimera, meaning "will love", derived from the verb aimer ("love"). The "future" expressed by the future tense usually means the future relative to the moment of speaking, although in contexts where relative tense is used it may mean the future relative to some other point in time under consideration.

<i>Going-to</i> future Grammatical construction

The going-to future is a grammatical construction used in English to refer to various types of future occurrences. It is made using appropriate forms of the expression to be going to. It is an alternative to other ways of referring to the future in English, such as the future construction formed with will – in some contexts the different constructions are interchangeable, while in others they carry somewhat different implications.

The perfect tense or aspect is a verb form that indicates that an action or circumstance occurred earlier than the time under consideration, often focusing attention on the resulting state rather than on the occurrence itself. An example of a perfect construction is I have made dinner. Although this gives information about a prior action, the focus is likely to be on the present consequences of that action. The word perfect in this sense means "completed".

The continuous and progressive aspects are grammatical aspects that express incomplete action or state in progress at a specific time: they are non-habitual, imperfective aspects.

The perfective aspect, sometimes called the aoristic aspect, is a grammatical aspect that describes an action viewed as a simple whole, i.e., a unit without interior composition. The perfective aspect is distinguished from the imperfective aspect, which presents an event as having internal structure. The term perfective should be distinguished from perfect.

Proto-Indo-European verbs reflect a complex system of morphology, more complicated than the substantive, with verbs categorized according to their aspect, using multiple grammatical moods and voices, and being conjugated according to person, number and tense. In addition to finite forms thus formed, non-finite forms such as participles are also extensively used.

Inchoative aspect, also known as inceptive, is a grammatical aspect, referring to the beginning of a state. It can be found in conservative Indo-European languages such as Latin and Lithuanian, and also in Finnic languages or European derived languages with high percentage of Latin-based words like Esperanto. It should not be confused with the prospective, which denotes actions that are about to start. The English language can approximate the inchoative aspect through the verbs "to become" or "to get" combined with an adjective.

In linguistics, telicity is the property of a verb or verb phrase that presents an action or event as having a specific endpoint. A verb or verb phrase with this property is said to be telic; if the situation it describes is not heading for any particular endpoint, it is said to be atelic.

A dynamic or fientive verb is a verb that shows continued or progressive action on the part of the subject. This is the opposite of a stative verb.

An inchoative verb, sometimes called an "inceptive" verb, shows a process of beginning or becoming. Productive inchoative affixes exist in several languages, including the suffixes present in Latin and Ancient Greek, and consequently some Romance languages. Not all verbs with inchoative suffixes have retained their inceptive meaning. In Italian, for example, present indicative finisco 'I finish' contains the form of the suffix, while present indicative finiamo 'we finish' does not, yet the only difference in meaning is that of person subject; the suffix is now semantically inert.

In linguistics and philosophy, modality refers to the ways language can express various relationships to reality or truth. For instance, a modal expression may convey that something is likely, desirable, or permissible. Quintessential modal expressions include modal auxiliaries such as "could", "should", or "must"; modal adverbs such as "possibly" or "necessarily"; and modal adjectives such as "conceivable" or "probable". However, modal components have been identified in the meanings of countless natural language expressions, including counterfactuals, propositional attitudes, evidentials, habituals, and generics.

In linguistics, a resultative is a form that expresses that something or someone has undergone a change in state as the result of the completion of an event. Resultatives appear as predicates of sentences, and are generally composed of a verb, a post-verbal noun phrase and a so-called resultative phrase which may be represented by an adjective, a prepositional phrase, or a particle, among others. For example, in the English sentence The man wiped the table clean, the adjective clean denotes the state achieved by the table as a result of the event described as the man wiped.

Tense–aspect–mood or tense–modality–aspect is an important group of grammatical categories, which are marked in different ways by different languages.

In linguistics, the aspect of a verb is a grammatical category that defines the temporal flow in a given action, event, or state. As its name suggests, the habitual aspect, not to be confused with iterative aspect or frequentative aspect, specifies an action as occurring habitually: the subject performs the action usually, ordinarily, or customarily. As such, the habitual aspect provides structural information on the nature of the subject referent, "John smokes" being interpretable as "John is a smoker", "Enjoh habitually gets up early in the morning" as "Enjoh is an early bird". The habitual aspect is a type of imperfective aspect, which does not depict an event as a single entity viewed only as a whole but instead specifies something about its internal temporal structure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uses of English verb forms</span> Conjugation, finiteness and verb conversion in English grammar

Modern standard English has various verb forms, including:

References

  1. Binnick, Robert I. (1991). Time and the verb : a guide to tense and aspect. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0195062069.
  2. Michaelis, Laura A. 2011. Stative by Construction. Linguistics 49: 1359-1400.
  3. Lee, EunHee. 2006. "Stative Progressives in Korean and English". Journal of Pragmatics 38 (5) (May): 695–717.
  4. Zeitoun, Elizabeth. 2000. "Dynamic Vs Stative Verbs in Mantauran (Rukai)". Oceanic Linguistics 39 (2) (December): 415–427.
  5. Smith, Carlota S. 1991 ″The parameter of aspect″ Kluwer Academic Publisher Dordrecht; Boston :
  6. Dowty, David R. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar : the Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ . Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
  7. Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Novakov, Predrag. 2009. "Dynamic-stative Distinction in English Verbs." Zbornik Matice Srpske Za Filologiju i Lingvistiku 52 (2): 187–195.