He walked.

[neb090]

1. He walked.
2. He singed.
3. He slept.
4. He stood.
5. He sat.
6. He lay.
7. He danced.

Are they all complete sentences?

 

[Phlebas the Phoenician]

1. He walked.
2. He singed.
3. He slept.
4. He stood.
5. He sat.
6. He lay.
7. He danced.

Are they all complete sentence?

The only two that can't stand as complete sentences, in my opinion, are "He singed" and "He lay."

"Singe" (meaning "lightly burn") is a strongly transitive verb; it wants and needs a direct object, even in the past tense ("singed"). Did you mean to write "He sang"?

"He lay" wants an adverb or adverbial of some kind, whether related to place ("He lay there," "He lay on the couch") or direction ("He lay down").

 

[jutfrank]

Apart from number 6, whose verb is incorrectly being used intransitively, they all count as grammatically complete sentences.

2. He sang.

 

[5jj]

"Singe" (meaning "lightly burn") is a strongly transitive verb;

I think it can be used intransitively.

So do some dictionaries, for example, https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/singe

 

[jutfrank]

"He lay" wants an adverb or adverbial of some kind, whether related to place ("He lay there," "He lay on the couch") or direction ("He lay down").

Agreed. I hadn't seen your post when I posted mine. (I now realise I was wrong when I said the verb 'lay' in sentence 6 has to be transitive. I was thinking of the transitive verb 'lay', not the past form of 'lie'.)

(And yes, neb090 surely meant I sang, not I singed! )

 

[neb090]

The only two that can't stand as complete sentences, in my opinion, are "He singed" and "He lay."

"Singe" (meaning "lightly burn") is a strongly transitive verb; it wants and needs a direct object, even in the past tense ("singed"). Did you mean to write "He sang"?

"He lay" wants an adverb or adverbial of some kind, whether related to place ("He lay there," "He lay on the couch") or direction ("He lay down").

I am sorry. My 2 is "He sang."

 

[neb090]

Apart from number 6, whose verb is incorrectly being used intransitively, they all count as grammatically complete sentences.

2. He sang.

My 6 is "He lay (in bed)." Do I have to add "in bed" to make it a complete sentence?

 

[neb090]

So

1. He walked.
2. He sang.
3. He slept.
4. He stood.
5. He sat.
6. He lay (in bed).
7. He danced.

Apart from 6, are others all complete sentences?

 

[Tarheel]

I don't quite see the point. Let's look at the first one. Let's say I'm talking to my friend and I want to talk about what I've been up to. I might say, "I walked to the store and back." While "I walked" is a complete sentence, it doesn't seem to me like a complete thought. When you talk you want to say something.

 

[jutfrank]

My 6 is "He lay (in bed)." Do I have to add "in bed" to make it a complete sentence?

Phlebas the Phoenician and I think you have to add something like 'in bed', yes.

 

[neb090]

Phlebas the Phoenician and I think you have to add something like 'in bed', yes.

I looked it up in the dictionary, and found that "sit", "lie(lay)", "stand" are all "incomplete intransitive verbs".

According to grammar rules, incomplete intransitive verbs need a "subjective complement."

So why can I say "He stood" and "He sat" while I can't say "He lay?"

 

[jutfrank]

So why can I say "He stood" and "He sat" while I can't say "He lay?"

I'm saying that He stood and He sat are complete whereas He lay is incomplete. It's incomplete in that it needs a complement in order to express a complete thought.

 

[dunchee]

I looked it up in the dictionary, and found that "sit", "lie(lay)", "stand" are all "incomplete intransitive verbs".

Sit, for example, isn’t an incomplete intransitive verb exclusively -- it is also a complete intransitive verb(*1), and this is where you get “He sat.” Lie is pretty much the same. Here is one example: “They lay.”(*2)

So why can I say "He stood" and "He sat" while I can't say "He lay?"

It’s not a question of “can” or “can’t”. It’s just that anglophones pretty much don’t say “s/he lay” or “I lay” in daily lives. With the right context, it’s possible (like the example shown above).

(*1) Wen Shin’s English-Chinese Dictionary of Contemporary English, publisher: Wen Shin
(*2) Corpus of Contemporary American English
Source: The Kenyon Review, 2001, Vol. 23, Iss 1; pg. 29
Title: Two Long Lost Stories From The Soviet 1920s
Author: Leonid Dobychin
Also from The Kenyon Review website:
Two Long Lost Stories from the Soviet 1920s
By Leonid Dobychin, translated by Natalia Belova and Richard C. Borden

 

[Phlebas the Phoenician]

It’s just that anglophones pretty much don’t say “s/he lay” or “I lay” in daily lives. With the right context, it’s possible (like the example shown above).

That example is a translation of a Russian sentence, so I'd be cautious about regarding it as a "right context" for using "lay" as a predicate unto itself in standard English.

"Lay" can certainly end a sentence or clause, but there will normally be an adverb or adverbial elsewhere which is related to "lay":

"There he lay."
"She was in the room where he lay."

When "lay" is used without an adverb or adverbial, it will normally function as a sort of linking verb, introducing an expression applying to the subject:

"He lay still."
"They lay awake."

I checked the Oxford English Dictionary online and briefly thought I'd found a very respectable old example of "lay" functioning without an adverbial or complement:

"O bliss, when all in circle drawn
About him, heart and ear were fed
To hear him, as he lay and read
The Tuscan poets on the lawn:"
- Alfred Lord Tennyson, In Memorium (1850)

However, even in that example, there is an adverbial related to "lay." It is down on the next line: ". . . he lay . . . on the lawn."

 

[neb090]

That example is a translation of a Russian sentence, so I'd be cautious about regarding it as a "right context" for using "lay" as a predicate unto itself in standard English.

"Lay" can certainly end a sentence or clause, but there will normally be an adverb or adverbial elsewhere which is related to "lay":

"There he lay."
"She was in the room where he lay."

When "lay" is used without an adverb or adverbial, it will normally function as a sort of linking verb, introducing an expression applying to the subject:

"He lay still."
"They lay awake."

I checked the Oxford English Dictionary online and briefly thought I'd found a very respectable old example of "lay" functioning without an adverbial or complement:

"O bliss, when all in circle drawn
About him, heart and ear were fed
To hear him, as he lay and read
The Tuscan poets on the lawn:"
- Alfred Lord Tennyson, In Memorium (1850)

However, even in that example, there is an adverbial related to "lay." It is down on the next line: ". . . he lay . . . on the lawn."

So, with regard to "stand" and "sit", these two words can be seen as "incomplete intransitive verbs" even when they are used without an adverb or adverbial. And if these two verbs are used with "adjective", then they can be seen as a "linking verb", is that correct.

For example:
1. They lay there. (lay is a incomplete intransitive verb)
2. They lay still. (lay is a linking verb)

Is that correct.

 

[Tarheel]

You're missing a couple of these --->?

Remember to capitalize the word that begins a sentence.

**an adjective

 

[Phlebas the Phoenician]

So, with regard to "stand" and "sit", these two words can be seen as "incomplete intransitive verbs" even when they are used without an adverb or adverbial. And if these two verbs are used with "adjective", then they can be seen as a "linking verb", is that correct.

For example:
1. They lay there. (lay is a incomplete intransitive verb)
2. They lay still. (lay is a linking verb)

I dislike the idea that there are "incomplete verbs." All verbs are complete. Many verbs just need one or more additions (a direct object, a subject complement, an adverbial) to form a complete predicate in a clause or sentence. However, "stand" and "sit" are not among such verbs. I agree with Jutfrank:

I'm saying that He stood and He sat are complete whereas He lay is incomplete. It's incomplete in that it needs a complement in order to express a complete thought.

 

[neb090]

I dislike the idea that there are "incomplete verbs." All verbs are complete. Many verbs just need one or more additions (a direct object, a subject complement, an adverbial) to form a complete predicate in a clause or sentence. However, "stand" and "sit" are not among such verbs. I agree with Jutfrank:

But "stand" and "sit" can also be among them.

Is that correct?

 

[jutfrank]

But "stand" and "sit" can also be among them.

Is that correct?

No, 'stand' and 'sit' are not among them. These two verbs don't need anything more to form a complete predicate.

 

[neb090]

No, 'stand' and 'sit' are not among them. These two verbs don't need anything more to form a complete predicate.

1. He sits still. (OK)
2. He sits. (OK)
3. He lay down. (OK)
4. He lay there. (OK)
5. He lay still. (OK)
6. He lay. (wrong)

Are they all correct?