|
#31
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
The leaves are everywhere [everywhere = adverb; therefore, are = not linking] He was late [late = adjective, not adverb (per your view); therefore was = linking verb] My question is: Why the difference? Semantically, it cannot be disputed that "Everywhere" (place) can be said to modify "leaves" in the same way that "late" (time) modifies "he", except that (unfortunately) "everywhere" doesn't want to co-operate, insisting on being an adverb. In my view, it's either both "everywhere" and "late" are adverbs, or both are adjectives. I cannot see how (in this comparison) one can be an orange and the other an apple. To sum up my viewpoint: The following is persuasive enough: (a) Where BE's complement is an adverb, then BE is not a linking verb; (b) Deriving from (a), a linking verb can only have a nominative or an adjective as its complement. Do you then agree that: (1) BE can have a predicate adverb as its complement, but in this case we cannot call it a linking verb; (2) In "He was late", "late" is an adverb and "was" is not a linking verb. |
|
#32
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
"Historically, adverbs used to appear regularly after linking verbs too." I wonder what this means: (A) People now no longer use adverbs after linking verbs (she was early, I was late, they were next, we were there, I'm downstairs, leaves are everywhere, etc)? or (B) Linking verbs have been re-defined to exclude adverbs from being their complement? or (C) Some or all of the adverbs in the examples in (A) above are no longer to be regarded as adverbs but become adjectives instead (early, late, next, there, downstairs, everywhere)? If it is (B), then I don't need any more persuading because it means only a change of terminology or the definition of "linking verb". What still remains is Nerfetiti's original question (that started all of this useful clarification): "I'm next." What part of speech is "next" here??? And also what I added: "He was late". What POS is "late" here??? Is there anyone else out there who can help? [Apart from engee30, myself, and Soup who seems to have dropped off this thread] Last edited by justinwschang; 17-Sep-2007 at 08:19. |
|
#33
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#34
| |||
| |||
| Re Leaves are everywhere vs. He was late, can you explain why "everywhere" is an adverb (therefore or because "are" is non-linking) but "late" is not an adverb (therefore or because "was" is a linking verb)? It looks to me that "everywhere" describes "leaves" no differently from how "late" describes "he". Generally, I'm not convinced or satisfied by explanations or justification based on fitting into a particular definition; rather, the semantics (meaning) deriving from the word's usage should determine what part of speech that word is functioning as. |
|
#35
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
English Grammar - Adjectives - Position in a Sentence - Word Power PS Let's call the verb be a semi-linking verb when used with everywhere (I'd go for including here and there as well). |
|
#36
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
The link you gave has these as adjectives: The children are here (My comment: debatable) The records are there (My comment: debatable) I am ready (My comment: agree, adverb is readily) All the above illustrates with the verb BE. Consider this: There it is (Adverb, per Reader's Digest Universal Dictionary RDUD) It is there (Adverb or adjective? RDUD didn't give this example) In my view, nothing has changed in meaning between these two sentences, except an inversion of word order, just as nothing changes between "he said" and "said he". The above "there" also illustrates with the verb BE. "There" as adjective: Darth Vader there will vaporise you (My example) John there will help you (RDUD example) Take that one there (RDUD example) It is significant that RDUD (in showing the uses of "there" as an adjective) does not illustrate with the verb BE, but ONLY the above two examples) Fundamentally: It is clear that BE gives rise to this debate: The records are there VS. The records are everywhere. Going by that website (and its author), everywhere should also be an adjective!!! Of all the parts of speech, certain adverbs and adjectives are the hardest to grasp. I am beginning to think that some authors (authorities?) are stretching it (with honest intention) to say that "there" (as in "The records are there) is an adjective because mentally it is hard to let go of the connection with the subject and let "there" remain as an adverb. I'd still want to ask them: What POS is "everywhere" in "The records are everywhere". |
|
#37
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
|
|
#38
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Quote:
... Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#39
| |||
| |||
| engee30, you seem to have missed my main concern or interest (amidst all these discussions). I have no problem with not calling BE a linking verb, where its complement is an adverb, and not a nominative or adjective. After all, a rose by any name is just as sweet. It's back to Nerfetiti's originating post: What part of speech is a particular word that completes the verb BE? I'm next. He's late. The children are here. The records are there. The leaves are everywhere. I'm downstairs. I'm still inclined to tell students that all these are ADVERBS and not adjectives, whatever we may want to call BE (linking, non-linking, part-linking were all "invented" not a hundred years ago!!). To quote: Historically, adverbs were regularly used after linking verbs. Last edited by justinwschang; 17-Sep-2007 at 10:33. Reason: typo |
|
#40
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |