There are two competing notions of the predicate in theories of grammar. Traditional grammar tends to view a predicate as one of two main parts of a sentence, the other being the subject, which the predicate modifies. The other understanding of predicates is inspired from work in predicate calculus (=predicate logic, first order logic). On this approach, the predicate of a sentence corresponds mainly to the main verb and any auxiliaries that accompany the main verb, whereby the arguments of that predicate (e.g. the subject and object noun phrases) are outside of the predicate. The competition between these two concepts has generated confusion concerning the use of the term "predicate" in theories of grammar. This article considers both of these notions.

Predicates in traditional grammar[link]

The predicate in traditional grammar is inspired by propositional logic of antiquity (as opposed to the more modern predicate logic). A predicate is seen as a property that a subject has or is characterized by. A predicate is therefore an expression that can be true of something. ^[1] Thus, the expression "is moving" is true of those things that are moving. This classical understanding of predicates was adopted more or less directly into Latin and Greek grammars and from there it made its way into English grammars, where it is applied directly to the analysis of sentence structure. It is also the understanding of predicates in English-language dictionaries. The predicate is one of the two main parts of a sentence (the other being the subject, which the predicate modifies).^[2] The predicate must contain a verb, and the verb requires, permits, or precludes other sentence elements to complete the predicate. These elements are: objects (direct, indirect, prepositional), predicatives, and adjuncts:

She dances. - verb-only predicate

Ben reads the book. - verb + direct object predicate

Ben's mother, Felicity, gave me a present. - verb + indirect object + direct object predicate

She listened to the radio. - verb + prepositional object predicate

They elected him president. - verb + object + predicative noun predicate

She met him in the park. - verb + object + adjunct predicate

She is in the park. - verb + predicative prepositional phrase predicate

The predicate provides information about the subject, such as what the subject is, what the subject is doing, or what the subject is like. The relation between a subject and its predicate is sometimes called a nexus. A predicative nominal is a noun phrase that functions as the main predicate of a sentence, such as "George III is the king of England", the king of England being the predicate nominal. The subject and predicative nominal must be connected by a linking verb, also called a copula. A predicative adjective is an adjective that functions as a predicate, such as "Ivano is attractive", attractive being the predicate adjective. The subject and predicate adjective must also be connected by a copula.

This traditional understanding of predicates has a concrete reflex in all phrase structure theories of syntax. These theories divide the generic declarative sentence into a noun phrase (NP) and verb phrase (VP). This concept of sentence structure stands in stark contrast to dependency structure theories of grammar, which place the finite verb (=conjugated verb) as the root of all sentence structure and thus reject the binary NP-VP division.

Alternative understanding[link]

The alternative understanding of predicates is inspired by work in predicate calculus as associated with Gottlob Frege. This understanding sees predicates as relations or functions over arguments. The predicate serves either to assign a property to a single argument or to relate two or more arguments to each other. Sentences consist of predicates and their arguments (and adjuncts) and are thus predicate-argument structures, whereby a given predicate is seen as linking its arguments into a greater structure. This understanding of predicates sometimes renders a predicate and its arguments in the following manner:

Bob laughed. → laughed (Bob)

Sam helped us. → helped (Sam, us)

Jim gave Jill his dog. → gave (Jim, Jill, his dog)

Predicates are placed on the left outside of brackets, whereas the predicate's arguments are placed inside the brackets. One acknowledges the valency of predicates, whereby a given predicate can be avalent (not shown), monovalent (laughed in the first sentence), divalent (helped in the second sentence), or trivalent (gave in the third sentence). These types of representations are analogous to formal semantic analyses, where one is concerned with the proper account of scope facts of quantifiers and logical operators. Concerning basic sentence structure however, these representations suggest above all that verbs are predicates and the noun phrases that they appear with are their arguments. On this understanding of the sentence, the binary division of the clause into subject NP and predicate VP is hardly possible. Instead, the verb is the predicate, and the noun phrases are its arguments.

When auxiliary verbs appear, they are viewed as part of the predicate. The predicates are in bold in the following examples:

Bill will have laughed.

Will Bill have laughed?

We were helped by Sam.

Were we helped by Sam?

Who did Jim give his dog to?

The understanding of predicates suggested by these examples sees predicates consisting of one main verb and zero, one, two, or more auxiliary verbs. These verbs need not form a string, but they can be interrupted by their arguments. The approach to predicates illustrated with these sentences is more widespread in Europe, particularly in Germany, where the understanding predicates from traditional grammar discussed above seems to hardly exist (for those who know German, see the Wikipedia article in German on the predicate).

There are certainly many questions about this understanding of predicates. For instance, while the predicate nouns and adjectives mentioned above can easily be viewed as forming the predicate, the situation is much less clear for the object NP of a preposition, e.g.

The book is on the shelf.

The book is on the shelf.

Whether the object NP the shelf should be included in the predicate, as shown in the first sentence, or excluded from the predicate, as shown in the second sentence, is not clear.

This alternative understanding of predicates is more compatible with the dependency grammar approach to sentence structure, which places the finite verb as the root of all structure, than it is with the phrase structure grammar (=constituency grammar) approach to sentence structure, which assumes the binary division of the clause into noun phrase (NP) and verb phrase (VP).

Carlson classes[link]

The seminal work of Greg Carlson distinguishes between types of predicates. Based on Carlson's work, predicates have been divided into the following sub-classes, which roughly pertain to how a predicate relates to its subject.

Stage-level predicates[link]

A stage-level predicate ("s-l predicate" for short) is true of a temporal stage of its subject. For example, if John is "hungry", then he typically will eat some food, which lasts a certain amount of time, and not his entire lifespan. S-l predicates can occur in a wide range of grammatical constructions and is probably the most versatile kind of predicate.

Individual-level predicates[link]

An individual-level predicate ("i-l predicate") is true throughout the existence of an individual. For example, if John is "smart", this is a property of him, regardless which particular point in time we consider. I-l predicates are more restricted than s-l ones. I-l predicates cannot occur in presentational "there" sentences (a star in front of a sentence indicates that it is odd or ill-formed):

There are police available. (available is s-l)

*There are firemen altruistic. (altruistic is i-l)

S-l predicates allow modification by manner adverbs and other adverbial modifiers. I-l ones do not.

Tyrone spoke French loudly in the corridor. (speak French can be interpreted as s-l)

*Tyrone knew French loudly in the corridor. (know French cannot be interpreted as s-l)

When an i-l predicate occurs in past tense, it gives rise to what is called a "lifetime effect": The subject must be assumed to be dead or otherwise gone out of existence.

John was available. (s-l Failed to parse (Missing texvc executable; please see math/README to configure.): \rightarrow

no lifetime effect)

John was altruistic. (i-lFailed to parse (Missing texvc executable; please see math/README to configure.): \rightarrow

lifetime effect.)

Kind-level predicates[link]

A kind-level predicate ("k-l predicate") is true of a kind of thing, but cannot be applied to individual members of the kind. An example of this is the predicate "are widespread." One can't meaningfully say of a particular individual John that he is widespread. One may only say this of kinds, as in

Humans are widespread.

Certain types of noun phrase cannot be the subject of a k-l predicate. We have just seen that a proper name cannot be. Singular indefinite noun phrases are also banned from this environment:

*A cat is widespread. (compare: Nightmares are widespread.)

Collective vs. distributive predicates[link]

Predicates may also be collective or distributive. Collective predicates require their subjects to be somehow plural, while distributive ones do not. An example of a collective predicate is "formed a line". This predicate can only stand in a nexus with a plural subject:

The students formed a line.

*The student formed a line.

Other examples of collective predicates include "meet in the woods", "surround the house", "gather in the hallway" and "carry the piano together". Note that the last one ("carry the piano together") can be made non-collective by removing the word "together". Quantifiers differ with respect to whether or not they can be the subject of a collective predicate. For example, quantifiers formed with "all the" can, while ones formed with "every" or "each" cannot.

All the students formed a line.

All the students gathered in the hallway.

All the students carried a piano together.

*Each student gathered in the hallway.

*Every student formed a line.

Other languages[link]

Japanese[link]

The topic–comment structure of Japanese grammar yields very distinct predicates (as the comment). Indeed, Japanese adjectives and Japanese verbs behave rather similarly (for example, the negative form of a verb is an adjective), and can be understood as being two forms of predicates; predicate form is referred to as 終止形 (shūshikei, terminal form). Further, unlike in English, Japanese adjectives do not exist independently of predication, and the dictionary form is the predicate form – for example, 小さい (chiisai) is the predicate form of "small", and means "is small", not simply "small". Accordingly, while some textbooks translate Japanese adjectives as English adjectives (translating 小さい as "small"), other textbooks, such as Japanese: The Spoken Language, translate Japanese adjectives as English predicates (translating 小さい as "is small"). Note however that the adjective 小さい (chiisai) can be used either as a predicate like in (1) kono ie wa chiisai. (this house is small) or as a determiner like in (2) chiisai ie (a small house).

See also[link]

• Clause
• Dependency grammar
• Inflectional phrase
• Phrase
• Phrase structure grammar
• Predicative (adjectival or nominal)
• Secondary predicate
• Topic–comment
• Verb

References[link]

Bibliography[link]

In linguistics, grammar is the set of structural rules that govern the composition of clauses, phrases, and words in any given natural language. The term refers also to the study of such rules, and this field includes morphology, syntax, and phonology, often complemented by phonetics, semantics, and pragmatics. Linguists do not normally use the term to refer to orthographical rules, although usage books and style guides that call themselves grammars may also refer to spelling and punctuation.

Use of the term[link]

The term grammar is often used by non-linguists with a very broad meaning. As Jeremy Butterfield puts it: "Grammar is often a generic way of referring to any aspect of English that people object to."^[1] However, linguists use it in a much more specific sense. Every speaker of a language has, in his or her head, a set of rules^[2] for using that language. This is a grammar, and—at least in the case of one's native language—the vast majority of the information in it is acquired not by conscious study or instruction, but by observing other speakers; much of this work is done during infancy. Language learning later in life, of course, may involve a greater degree of explicit instruction.^[3]

The term "grammar" can also be used to describe the rules that govern the linguistic behaviour of a group of speakers. The term "English grammar", therefore, may have several meanings. It may refer to the whole of English grammar—that is, to the grammars of all the speakers of the language—in which case, the term encompasses a great deal of variation.^[4] Alternatively, it may refer only to what is common to the grammars of all, or of the vast majority of English speakers (such as subject–verb–object word order in simple declarative sentences). Or it may refer to the rules of a particular, relatively well-defined variety of English (such as Standard English).

"An English grammar" is a specific description, study or analysis of such rules. A reference book describing the grammar of a language is called a "reference grammar" or simply "a grammar." A fully explicit grammar that exhaustively describes the grammatical constructions of a language is called a descriptive grammar. Linguistic description contrasts with linguistic prescription, which tries to enforce rules of how a language is to be used.

Grammatical frameworks are approaches to constructing grammars. The most known among the approaches is the traditional grammar which is traditionally taught in schools.

The standard framework of generative grammar is the transformational grammar model developed in various ways by Noam Chomsky and his associates from the 1950s onwards.

Etymology[link]

The word grammar derives from Greek γραμματικὴ τέχνη (grammatikē technē), which means "art of letters", from γράμμα (gramma), "letter", itself from γράφειν (graphein), "to draw, to write".^[5]

History[link]

The first systematic grammars originated in Iron Age India, with Yaska (6th c. BC), Pāṇini (4th c. BC) and his commentators Pingala (ca. 200 BC), Katyayana, and Patanjali (2nd c. BC). In the West, grammar emerged as a discipline in Hellenism from the 3rd c. BC forward with authors like Rhyanus and Aristarchus of Samothrace, the oldest extant work being the Art of Grammar (Τέχνη Γραμματική), attributed to Dionysius Thrax (ca. 100 BC). Latin grammar developed by following Greek models from the 1st century BC, due to the work of authors such as Orbilius Pupillus, Remmius Palaemon, Marcus Valerius Probus, Verrius Flaccus, and Aemilius Asper.

Tolkāppiyam is the earliest Tamil grammar; it has been dated variously between 1st CE and 10th CE.

A grammar of Irish originated in the 7th century with the Auraicept na n-Éces.

Arabic grammar emerged from the 8th century with the work of Ibn Abi Ishaq and his students.

The first treatises on Hebrew grammar appeared in the High Middle Ages, in the context of Mishnah (exegesis of the Hebrew Bible). The Karaite tradition originated in Abbasid Baghdad. The Diqduq (10th century) is one of the earliest grammatical commentaries on the Hebrew Bible.^[6] Ibn Barun in the 12th century compares the Hebrew language with Arabic in the Islamic grammatical tradition.^[7]

Belonging to the trivium of the seven liberal arts, grammar was taught as a core discipline throughout the Middle Ages, following the influence of authors from Late Antiquity, such as Priscian. Treatment of vernaculars began gradually during the High Middle Ages, with isolated works such as the First Grammatical Treatise, but became influential only in the Renaissance and Baroque periods. In 1486, Antonio de Nebrija published Las introduciones Latinas contrapuesto el romance al Latin, and the first Spanish grammar, Gramática de la lengua castellana, in 1492. During the 16th century Italian Renaissance, the Questione della lingua was the discussion on the status and ideal form of the Italian language, initiated by Dante's de vulgari eloquentia (Pietro Bembo, Prose della volgar lingua Venice 1525). The first grammar of Slovene language was written in 1584 by Adam Bohorič.

Grammars of non-European languages began to be compiled for the purposes of evangelization and Bible translation from the 16th century onward, such as Grammatica o Arte de la Lengua General de los Indios de los Reynos del Perú (1560), and a Quechua grammar by Fray Domingo de Santo Tomás.

In 1643 there appeared Ivan Uzhevych's Grammatica sclavonica and, in 1762, the Short Introduction to English Grammar of Robert Lowth was also published. The Grammatisch-Kritisches Wörterbuch der hochdeutschen Mundart, a High German grammar in five volumes by Johann Christoph Adelung, appeared as early as 1774.

From the latter part of the 18th century, grammar came to be understood as a subfield of the emerging discipline of modern linguistics. The Serbian grammar by Vuk Stefanović Karadžić arrived in 1814, while the Deutsche Grammatik of the Brothers Grimm was first published in 1818. The Comparative Grammar of Franz Bopp, the starting point of modern comparative linguistics, came out in 1833.

Development of grammars[link]

Grammars evolve through usage and also due to separations of the human population. With the advent of written representations, formal rules about language usage tend to appear also. Formal grammars are codifications of usage that are developed by repeated documentation over time, and by observation as well. As the rules become established and developed, the prescriptive concept of grammatical correctness can arise. This often creates a discrepancy between contemporary usage and that which has been accepted, over time, as being correct. Linguists tend to view prescriptive grammars as having little justification beyond their authors' aesthetic tastes, although style guides may give useful advice about standard language employment, based on descriptions of usage in contemporary writings of the same language. Linguistic prescriptions also form part of the explanation for variation in speech, particularly variation in the speech of an individual speaker (an explanation, for example, for why some people say, "I didn't do nothing"; some say, "I didn't do anything"; and some say one or the other depending on social context).

The formal study of grammar is an important part of education for children from a young age through advanced learning, though the rules taught in schools are not a "grammar" in the sense most linguists use the term, particularly as they are often prescriptive rather than descriptive.

Constructed languages (also called planned languages or conlangs) are more common in the modern day. Many have been designed to aid human communication (for example, naturalistic Interlingua, schematic Esperanto, and the highly logic-compatible artificial language Lojban). Each of these languages has its own grammar.

Syntax refers to linguistic structure above the word level (e.g. how sentences are formed)—though without taking into account intonation, which is the domain of phonology. Morphology, by contrast, refers to structure at and below the word level (e.g. how compound words are formed), but above the level of individual sounds, which, like intonation, are in the domain of phonology.^[8] No clear line can be drawn, however, between syntax and morphology. Analytic languages use syntax to convey information that is encoded via inflection in synthetic languages. In other words, word order is not significant and morphology is highly significant in a purely synthetic language, whereas morphology is not significant and syntax is highly significant in an analytic language. Chinese and Afrikaans, for example, are highly analytic, and meaning is therefore very context-dependent. (Both do have some inflections, and have had more in the past; thus, they are becoming even less synthetic and more "purely" analytic over time.) Latin, which is highly synthetic, uses affixes and inflections to convey the same information that Chinese does with syntax. Because Latin words are quite (though not completely) self-contained, an intelligible Latin sentence can be made from elements that are placed in a largely arbitrary order. Latin has a complex affixation and simple syntax, while Chinese has the opposite.

Grammar frameworks[link]

Various "grammar frameworks" have been developed in theoretical linguistics since the mid 20th century, in particular under the influence of the idea of a "universal grammar" in the United States. Of these, the main divisions are:

• Transformational grammar (TG)
• Systemic functional grammar (SFG)
• Principles and Parameters Theory (P&P)
• Lexical-functional Grammar (LFG)
• Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar (GPSG)
• Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG)
• Dependency grammars (DG)
• Role and reference grammar (RRG)

Education[link]

Prescriptive grammar is taught in primary school (elementary school). The term "grammar school" historically refers to a school teaching Latin grammar to future Roman citizens, orators, and, later, Catholic priests. In its earliest form, "grammar school" referred to a school that taught students to read, scan, interpret, and declaim Greek and Latin poets (including Homer, Virgil, Euripides, Ennius, and others). These should not be confused with the related, albeit distinct, modern British grammar schools.

A standard language is a particular dialect of a language that is promoted above other dialects in writing, education, and broadly speaking in the public sphere; it contrasts with vernacular dialects, which may be the objects of study in descriptive grammar but which are rarely taught prescriptively. The standardized "first language" taught in primary education may be subject to political controversy, since it establishes a standard defining nationality or ethnicity.

Recently, efforts have begun to update grammar instruction in primary and secondary education. The primary focus has been to prevent the use of outdated prescriptive rules in favor of more accurate descriptive ones and to change perceptions about relative "correctness" of standard forms in comparison to non standard dialects.

The pre-eminence of Parisian French has reigned largely unchallenged throughout the history of modern French literature. Standard Italian is not based on the speech of the capital, Rome, but on the speech of Florence because of the influence Florentines had on early Italian literature. Similarly, standard Spanish is not based on the speech of Madrid, but on the one of educated speakers from more northerly areas like Castile and León. In Argentina and Uruguay the Spanish standard is based on the local dialects of Buenos Aires and Montevideo (Rioplatense Spanish). Portuguese has for now two official written standards, respectively Brazilian Portuguese and European Portuguese, but in a short term it will have a unified orthography.^[9]

The Serbian language is divided in a similar way; Serbia and the Republika Srpska use their own separate standards. The existence of a third standard is a matter of controversy, some consider Montenegrin as a separate language, and some think it's merely another variety of Serbian.

Norwegian has two standards, Bokmål and Nynorsk, the choice between which is subject to controversy: Each Norwegian municipality can declare one of the two its official language, or it can remain "language neutral". Nynorsk is endorsed by a minority of 27 percent of the municipalities. The main language used in primary schools normally follows the official language of its municipality, and is decided by referendum within the local school district. Standard German emerged out of the standardized chancellery use of High German in the 16th and 17th centuries. Until about 1800, it was almost entirely a written language, but now it is so widely spoken that most of the former German dialects are nearly extinct.

Standard Chinese has official status as the standard spoken form of the Chinese language in the People's Republic of China (PRC), the Republic of China (ROC) and the Republic of Singapore. Pronunciation of Standard Chinese is based on the Beijing dialect of Mandarin Chinese, while grammar and syntax are based on modern vernacular written Chinese. Modern Standard Arabic is directly based on Classical Arabic, the language of the Qur'an. The Hindustani language has two standards, Hindi and Urdu.

In the United States, the Society for the Promotion of Good Grammar designated March 4 as National Grammar Day in 2008.^[10]

See also[link]

Notes and references[link]

External links[link]

Look up grammar in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

•  Archibald Henry Sayce (1911). "Grammar". In Chisholm, Hugh. Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. 
• GrammarBank : Grammar rules explanations with examples and exercises online
• The syntax of natural language: An online introduction using the Trees program -- Beatrice Santorini & Anthony Kroch, University of Pennsylvania, 2007
• The Grammar Vandal (Funny, informative blog that fixes bad grammar.)
• The "Blog" of "Unnecessary" Quotes (Another educational, still funny poke at people who incorrectly use quote marks.)

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Grammar