Jim has to find his lost wallet.

[Luckysquirty]

1. Jim has to find his lost wallet.

Is "has" the main verb or auxiliary?

2. I used to be a student.

What about "used"? If "used" is the auxiliary verb, what is the main verb -- to be?

Thank you.

 

[Phaedrus]

1. Jim has to find his lost wallet.

Is "has" the main verb or auxiliary?

2. I used to be a student.

What about "used"? If "used" is the auxiliary verb, what is the main verb -- to be?

Neither "has (to)" nor "used (to)" is an auxiliary verb if "auxiliary verb" is defined as a verb with the following behavioral properties:

1) Used in Forming Negation: We add the auxiliary "do." We say "Jim doesn't have to find his lost wallet" and "I didn't use(d) to be a student," not "Jim hasn't to find his lost wallet" or "I use(d)n't to be a student." The latter constructions are, however, found here and there in historical usage.

2) Used in Question Formation: We add the auxiliary "do." We say "Doesn't Jim have to find his lost wallet" and "Did you use(d) to be a student," not "Has Jim to find his lost wallet" or "Used you to be a student?" The latter constructions, or at least the one with "used," used to be used by some speakers.

3) Used in Clausal Emphasis: We add the auxiliary "do." We say "Jim DOES have to find his lost wallet" and "I DID use(d) to be a student," not "Jim HAS to find his lost wallet" or "I USED to be a student." Though the latter sentences are fine, they do not constitute emphasis at the level of the clause.

4) Licenses Verb Phrase Ellipsis: We need "to." We say "Jim doesn't want to look for his wallet, but he has to" and "I don't go to school now, but I used to," not *"[strike]Jim doesn't want to look for his wallet, but he has[/strike]" or *"[strike]I don't go to school now, but I used.[/strike]"

 

[Luckysquirty]

So "has" and "used" are the main verbs or are the sentences written incorrectly?

 

[Phaedrus]

So "has" and "used" are the main verbs or are the sentences written incorrectly?

Each sentence consists of an independent clause with a finite clause (a clause displaying tense) and a nonfinite clause (a clause without tense).

"Has" and "used" are the verbs of the respective finite clauses in each sentence. They are also the verbs of the topmost clause of each sentence.

 

[PaulMatthews]

1. Jim has to find his lost wallet.

Is "has" the main verb or auxiliary?

2. I used to be a student. What about "used"? If "used" is the auxiliary verb, what is the main verb -- to be?

[1] Jim has [to find his lost wallet].

[2] I used [to be a student].

The term 'main verb' is potentially misleading. For example, the verb "be" is always an auxiliary verb, even when it’s the only verb in the sentence. 'Main' and 'auxiliary' are thus not in contrast since both kinds can in fact fulfill the traditional definition of 'main verb'.

The fact that "has" and "used" are located in the 'main' (matrix or upper) clauses, while "find" and "be" are in the bracketed subordinate clauses is irrelevant. The lexical/auxiliary contrast cuts across that between 'main' and subordinate.

The primary contrast is thus between lexical verbs and auxiliary verbs, the latter being those verbs with certain distinctive properties, called the 'NICE' properties (as Phaedrus explained).

In both [1] and [2], then, we can say that "has", "find” and "used" are lexical verbs, while "be" is an auxiliary verb.


(Note that for some speakers, the verbs "have" and "used" in your examples are auxiliaries, but they are in a minority, so I’ll leave that view alone).

 

[TheParser]

Is "has" the main verb or auxiliary?

NOT A TEACHER

Luckysquirty,

I have just checked eight books in my library, and they all have slightly different explanations. So I have just selected one to share with you.

1. We are dealing with what some books refer to as a "complementary infinitive." That is to say, the infinitive completes (complements) the meaning starting with the verb "have."

2. "I have to go" is about the same as "I must go." (In the latter sentence, you can see that the modal "must" is considered an auxiliary verb.)

3. My source claims that we should diagram the sentence as follows: "have" is an auxiliary. "To go" is an infinitive that completes the meaning. The whole predicate verb is "have to go."

Source: House and Harman, Descriptive English Grammar (1931), pages 335-336.


P.S. I have noticed that some books prefer to consider "have to" as a modal auxiliary ( = must) + bare infinitive.

 

[PaulMatthews]

1. Jim has to find his lost wallet.

Is "has" the main verb or auxiliary?

2. I used to be a student.

What about "used"? If "used" is the auxiliary verb, what is the main verb -- to be?

Thank you.

Jim has to find his lost wallet.

As I mentioned in my previous reply, stative "have", as used in the original example, is for some speakers an auxiliary, but they are in a minority, Consider these pairs:

[1] I don't have to sign all the documents. [lexical]
[2] I haven't to sign all the documents. [auxiliary]

[3] Do I have to sign all the documents? [lexical]
[4] Have I to sign all the documents? [auxiliary]


I think's it's reasonable to say that most speakers would prefer use lexical "have", as in [1] and [3], as opposed to auxiliary "have" in [2 and [4].

 

[Luckysquirty]

"Has" and "Find" are both lexical verbs?

Jim has to find his lost wallet.

Like the wallet, I am lost. Could you explain how this is possible. Thanks.

 

[TheParser]

Is "has" the main verb or auxiliary?

NOT A TEACHER

Luckysquirty,

Because of Mr. Matthews's interesting post #8, I thought that you would like to know another book's explanation.

"I have to make a speech."

My source says that the infinitive phrase "to make a speech" forms with a finite verb (I assume "finite verb" is the same as Mr. Matthews's "lexical verb") such a close connection "that the primary purpose of the infinitive seems to complete the predication begun by the verb."


Source: Pence and Emery, A Grammar of Present-Day English (1947), page 69.

 

[PaulMatthews]

"Has" and "Find" are both lexical verbs?

Jim has to find his lost wallet.

Like the wallet, I am lost. Could you explain how this is possible. Thanks.

As I explained in #5, auxiliary verbs are verbs with the NICE properties. Verbs that don't have those distinctive properties are lexical verbs.

"Find" is a lexical verb for all speakers. Static "have" is a lexical verb for most (but not all) speakers, see #8

 

[Luckysquirty]

As I explained in #5, auxiliary verbs are verbs with the NICE properties. Verbs that don't have those distinctive properties are lexical verbs.

"Find" is a lexical verb for all speakers. Static "have" is a lexical verb for most (but not all) speakers, see #8

My confusion stems from my own way of parsing: "has" verb and "to find" (with phrase) infinitive as direct object.


He has money.

He has to have money for the groceries.

 

[PaulMatthews]

My confusion stems from my own way of parsing: "has" verb and "to find" (with phrase) infinitive as direct object.

He has money. He has to have money for the groceries.

Jim has [to find his lost wallet].

The bracketed subordinate clause is complement of "has, not direct object.

The same applies to "to have money for groceries" -- complement of "has"

 

[emsr2d2]

I will start by saying I have no experience of parsing sentences but I would have thought it would be:

He has to [find his wallet].

As "has to" means "must" and, if it were replaced by "must", there would be no need for the word "to", I assumed "to" was joined to "has".

 

[Phaedrus]

As "has to" means "must" and, if it were replaced by "must", there would be no need for the word "to", I assumed "to" was joined to "has".

In informal English, "to" undergoes contraction to "has," as well as to "have" and "had," in this usage: "hasta," "hafta," "hadda." Similarly, for "used to," we have "usta"; for "ought to," "oughta"; for "supposed to," "sposta"; for "going to," "gonna"; for "got to," "gotta"; and for "want to," "wanna." Geoffrey Pullum labeled precisely these seven contracted forms "the therapy verbs" in his 1997 article "The Morpholexical Nature of English to-Contraction."

One way of demonstrating that the "to" is not inseparable from the preceding verb in these constructions is through the type of ellipsis known as Gapping:

(a) John has to wash his car today, and Mary to clean the house. ["has" is elided in the second independent clause]
(b) John used to act in school plays, and Mary to play the violin in the school's orchestra. ["used" is elided in the second independent clause]

In contrast, the following are ungrammatical, even in informal English:

(a') *[strike]John hasta wash his car today, and Mary clean the house.[/strike]["hasta" can't be elided in the second independent clause]
(b') *[strike]John usta act in school plays, and Mary play the violin in the school's orchestra.[/strike]["usta" can't be elided in the second independent clause]