grammar: 2012

Senin, 30 Juli 2012

tenses

Simple Present Tense
1.i study hard
2.you always came late
3.we never go the zoo
4.the usually play
5.he speak english well
6.she seldom calls her darling
7.it depends on the weather

Kamis, 19 Juli 2012

present continuous tense

In English, "now" can mean: this second, today, this month, this year, this century, and so on. Sometimes, we use the Present Continuous to say that we are in the process of doing a longer action which is in progress; however, we might not be doing it at this exact second.

Examples: (All of these sentences can be said while eating dinner in a restaurant.)

I am studying to become a doctor.
I am not studying to become a dentist.
I am reading the book Tom Sawyer.
I am not reading any books right now.
Are you working on any special projects at work?
Aren't you teaching at the university now?

USE 3 Near Future

Sometimes, speakers use the Present Continuous to indicate that something will or will not happen in the near future.

Examples:

I am meeting some friends after work.
I am not going to the party tonight.
Is he visiting his parents next weekend?
Isn't he coming with us tonight?

USE 4 Repetition and Irritation with "Always"

The Present Continuous with words such as "always" or "constantly" expresses the idea that something irritating or shocking often happens. Notice that the meaning is like Simple Present, but with negative emotion. Remember to put the words "always" or "constantly" between "be" and "verb+ing."

Examples:

She is always coming to class late.
He is constantly talking. I wish he would shut up.
I don't like them because they are always complaining.

REMEMBER Non-Continuous Verbs/ Mixed Verbs

future perfect tense

Verbs that use être in the past ("House of Être" verbs, reflexive verbs) also use être in forming the present perfect. For example, je serai venu(e) uses the future of être because of the action verb, venir (to come), which uses être in the past.
To form the future form of the auxiliary verbs, one uses the future stem and adds the endings -ai, -as, -a, -ons, -ez, -ont. Both avoir and être have irregular future stems; while, with the exception of -re verbs, most verbs use the infinitive as the future stem (e.g. je parler ai, I will speak), the future stem of avoir "is" aur, and that of être is ser.
To form the past participle in French, one usually adds -é, -i, and -u to the roots of -er, -ir, and -re verbs, respectively. However, there are many exceptions to this rule, including these commonly used ones (and all of their related verbs):

faire: fait
mettre: mis
ouvrir: ouvert
prendre: pris
venir: venu

Verbs related to mettre ("to put"): promettre ("to promise"); to ouvrir: offrir ("to offer"), souffrir ("to suffer"); to prendre ("to take"): apprendre ("to learn"), comprendre ("to understand"); to venir ("to come"): revenir ("to come again"), devenir ("to become").
When using être as the auxiliary verb, one must make sure that the past participle agrees with the subject: je serai venu ("I [masc.] will have come"), je serai venue ("I [fem.] will have come"); nous serons venus ("We [masc. or mixed] will have come"), nous serons venues ('We [fem.] will have come"). Verbs using avoir do not need agreement.
To make this form negative, one simply adds ne (n' if before vowel) before the auxiliary verb and pas after it: je n'aurai pas parlé; je ne serai pas venu. For reflexive verbs, one puts the reflexive pronoun before the auxiliary verb: from se baigner ("to take a bath"), je me serai baigné; negative: je ne me serai pas baigné.

FUTURE TENSE

The most common auxiliary verbs used to express futurity are will and shall.
Prescriptive grammarians distinguish between these, preferring to express the simple future as will in the second and third persons and shall in the first person, and preferring to express obligation or determination in the opposite cases. However, in modern English worldwide, shall and will are generally used interchangeably,^[4] with will being more common. See also shall and will.
Other periphrastic forms for the future include:

to be going to + Verb, e.g. John is going to leave tonight.
to be to + Verb, e.g. John is to leave tonight, which with the zero copula of newspaper headline style becomes simply to + Verb, e.g. John to leave tonight.

A periphrastic form for the immediate future is

to be about to + Verb, e.g. John is about to leave (any minute).

A dialectical form in Northern England is:

mun, derived from Old Norse, which implies obligation.

In all dialects of spoken English both shall and will are commonly elided into 'll (I'll go could be either "I will go" or "I shall go") so that the differences between the two have been worn down.
English also uses must, should, can, may and might in a similar way:

Must expresses the highest degree of obligation and commitment (I / you must go) and is temporally nearest to present time in its expression of futurity ("I must go now.")
Should (the subjunctive form of shall in this context) implies obligation or commitment to the action contemplated.
Can implies the ability to commit the action but does not presuppose obligation or firm commitment to the action.
May expresses a relatively low sense of commitment (I may go) and is the most permissive (You may go); it can also suggest conditionality (I may go [if I have time]).
Might expresses a very low sense of commitment or obligation (I / you might go if I / you feel like it).

English often employs the simple non-past (base form or base form + s in the third person singular) to convey scheduled futurity, as in tomorrow I leave at 5:00.
The simple non-past form is mandatory for expressing the future in a dependent clause when the main clause uses will, shall, or (be) going to: I will see you when I get there (not ...when I will get there); If you build it they will come (not If you will build it...); she will not know that I am there (not ...that I will be there).

Summary of forms

I will/shall go
I'm going to go / I am going to go
I'm to go / I am to go
I'm about to go / I am about to go
I must go
I should go
I can go
I may go
I might go
I go

To express futurity in the negative, a negative adverb such as not or never is inserted before the main verb (or the suffix -n't is added to the auxiliary), as in all other auxiliary constructions:

I will/shall not go.....I won't/shan't go.....Will/shall I not go?.....Won't/shan't I go?
He's not going to go / He is not going to go.....Is he not going to go?.....Isn't he going to go?
He's not to go / He is not to go.....Is he not to go?.....Isn't he to go?
He's not about to go / He is not about to go.....Is he not about to go?.....Isn't he about to go?
I must not go.....I mustn't go.....Must I not go?.....Mustn't I go?
I should not go.....I shouldn't go.....Should I not go?.....Shouldn't I go?
I cannot go (cannot is conventional rather than can not).....I can't go.....Can I not go?.....Can't I go?
He may never go.....May he never go?
I might not go.....I mightn't go.....Might I not go?.....Mightn't I go?

In all of these, action within a future range of time is contemplated. However, in all cases, the sentences are actually voiced in the present tense, since there is no proper future tense in English. It is the implication of futurity that makes these present tense auxiliary constructions amount to a compound future quasi-tense.

PUISI

My mother bore me in the southern wild,
And I am black, but O my soul is white!
White as an angel is the English child,
But I am black, as if bereaved of light.
My mother taught me underneath a tree,
And, sitting down before the heat of day,
She took me on her lap and kissed me,
And, pointing to the East, began to say:
‘Look on the rising sun: there God does live,
And gives His light, and gives His heat away,
And flowers and trees and beasts and men receive
Comfort in morning, joy in the noonday.
‘And we are put on earth a little space,
That we may learn to bear the beams of love;
And these black bodies and this sunburnt face
Are but a cloud, and like a shady grove.
‘For, when our souls have learned the heat to bear,
The cloud will vanish, we shall hear His voice,
Saying, “Come out from the grove, my love and care,
And round my golden tent like lambs rejoice.”‘
Thus did my mother say, and kissed me,
And thus I say to little English boy.
When I from black, and he from white cloud free,
And round the tent of God like lambs we joy,
I’ll shade him from the heat till he can bear
To lean in joy upon our Father’s knee;
And then I’ll stand and stroke his silver hair,
And be like him, and he will then love me.

PRICE TAG

Seems like everybody’s got a price
I wonder how they sleep at night
When the sale comes first and the truth comes second
Just stop for a minute and smile
Why is everybody so serious?
Acting so damn mysterious
You got your shades on your eyes and your heels so high
That you can’t even have a good time
Everybody look to their left
Everybody look to their right
Can you feel that? Yeah
We’ll pay them with love tonight
It’s not about the money, money, money
We don’t need your money, money, money
We just wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Ain’t about the cha-ching, cha-ching
Ain’t about the ba-bling, ba-bling
Wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
We need to take it back in time
When music made us all unite
And it wasn’t low blows and video hoes
Am I the only one gettin’ tired?
Why is everybody so obsessed?
Money can’t buy us happiness
Can we all slow down and enjoy right now
Guarantee we’ll be feelin’ alright
Everybody look to their left
Everybody look to their right
Can you feel that? Yeah
We’ll pay them with love tonight
It’s not about the money, money, money
We don’t need your money, money, money
We just wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Ain’t about the cha-ching, cha-ching
Ain’t about the ba-bling, ba-bling
Wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Yeah, yeah, well, keep the price tag and take the cash back
Just give me six strings and a half stack
And you can keep the cars, leave me the garage
And all I, yes, all I need are keys and guitars
And guess what, in 30 seconds I’m leaving to Mars
Yes, we leaving across these undefeatable odds
It’s like this man, you can’t put a price on life
We do this for the love, so we fight and sacrifice every night
So we ain’t gon’ stumble and fall, never
Waiting to see, a sign of defeat, uh uh
So we gon’ keep everyone moving their feet
So bring back the beat and then everybody sing, it’s not about
It’s not about the money, money, money
We don’t need your money, money, money
We just wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Ain’t about the cha-ching, cha-ching
Ain’t about the ba-bling, ba-bling
Wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
It’s not about the money, money, money
We don’t need your money, money, money
We just wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Ain’t about the cha-ching, cha-ching
Ain’t about the ba-bling, ba-bling
Wanna make the world dance
Forget about the price tag
Yeah, yeah
Oh, forget about the price tag

Rabu, 18 Juli 2012

collection of poems

roads to the city paris
many houses in rows
let me die tip kris
sweet home to my sister who ...

to buy a cap Cimanggis
do you find beautiful skullcap
so many girls who stop
only my sister who captured the heart

if I'm a hunter
I found her fawn
if my sister was jealous
a sign of love is still true

where it is coming leech
from the field down to the times
where it is coming in love
from the eyes down to the heart

Very romantic collection of love poems:

well candy
for I drink herbal
wherever you go
I miss you slalu

although only the fruit of guava
but it can be mixed
though rarely met
my love just for you

O one who yearns reed serulig
his voice appealed
O girl pujaanku
I really love you

though I'm full
still have to take medical
My dear woman
Could I visit
New! Click

PRESENT TENSE

The English present tense can be combined with aspects in the following verbal constructions:
The present simple or simple present is used in several ways:

to describe both habits and or routines (habitual aspect) (I eat breakfast every morning at 6:30; I go to work every day), and general facts or the truth (The earth revolves around the sun);

to present thoughts, feelings, and other unchanging states (stative aspect) (I think so; I like it; It is hot; The sun always shines in the desert);

to indicate scheduled events in the near future (so that the simple “present” verb form actually indicates future tense) (I take the train tomorrow at 6:00);

to indicate events at any time in the future in a dependent clause (I’ll retire when I reach age 65);

to provide narratives such as instructional narratives (Now I mix the ingredients; now I put the pan in the oven);

to narrate past events (the historical present) for stylistic effect.

In the present simple, English uses the verb without an ending (I get the lunch ready at one o’clock, usually.) except that in the third person singular, (after he, she, it, your friend, etc.) the suffix -s or -es is appended to the verb (It gets busy on the weekends; Sarah catches the early train).
The present simple tense is often used with adverbs of repeated time, as in these examples with the adverbs shown in italics:

I never come to school by cycle.

He always forgets to do his homework.

I never catch the late bus home.

The emphatic present: The present tense can be expressed with emphasis by using the auxiliary verb do and the uninflected main verb, (I do walk, He does walk).
The present progressive or present continuous: This form is used to describe events happening now, e.g., I am reading this wiki article, and I am thinking about editing it. This tense is formed by combining the present form of the verb “to be” with a present participle.
The present perfect In English this is a present tense with retrospective aspect, which describes a present state of existence based on past action (I have visited Paris several times; I have listened to you for five minutes now).
The present perfect progressive: This is used to describe events or actions that have begun at some point in the past and continue through the present, e.g., I have been reading this book for some time now.

PHARASAL

Phrasal verb complexes are particularly frequent in the English language, as they are in all Germanic languages. A phrasal verb complex has its literal usage, where the meanings of both the verb and the prepositional phrase are clear, as well as idiomatic usages, extensions from the core meanings of the verb and prepositional phrase. At times the idiom stems from the verb, and at times from the prepositional phrase, and at times from both.
Literal Usage
Many verbs in English can interact with an adverb or a preposition, and the verb + preposition/adverb complex is readily understood when used in its literal sense. Note that the difference between preposition and adverb is very vague in English, and for all intents and purposes the so-called "adverb" is in actual fact a prepositional phrase in its own right. True adverbs cannot appear in such complexes. This usage of the phrasal verb complex is its core or basic use, from which idiomatic usages derive.

"He walked across the square."
"She opened the shutters and looked outside."
"When he heard the crash, he looked up."

The function of the prepositional phrase/particle in such clauses is to show the relationship between the action (walked, opened, looked) and the relative positioning, action or state of the subject. Even when such prepositions appear on their own, they have a retrievable prepositional object. Thus, He walked across clearly shows that the "walking" is "across" a given area. In the case of He walked across the square, across the square is a prepositional phrase (with across as its head-word). In both cases, the single-word/multi-word prepositional phrase (across and across the square) is independent of the verb. The action of the subject (walking) is being portrayed as having happened in/at/on/over a certain location (across the square). Similarly in She opened the shutters and looked outside and When he heard the crash, he looked up. Outside is logically outside (of) the house, and up is similarly a prepositional adjunct (= upwards, in an upwards direction, he is looking in a direction that is higher than where his eyes were previously directed).
Idiomatic usage
For some writers, teachers and researchers, any verb + particle complex is a potential phrasal verb, while for others only those that are found in idiomatic uses are true "phrasal verbs". The reasoning for this is that in the idiom the combined meaning of verb plus particle appears to be totally different from each of its component parts, and that ergo the semantic content of the phrasal verb cannot be predicted by its constituent parts, as appears to be the case with get over and get over with:

"I hope you will get over your operation quickly."
"Work hard, and get your examination over with."

Here, the claim is that the literal meaning of "get over X", in the sense of "to climb over something to get to the other side", no longer applies to explain the subject's enduring an operation or the stress of an examination which they have to overcome.
However, such researchers not only confuse the concepts of concrete, abstract and idiom, but also - by focusing solely on the phrasal verb complex - fail to keep in mind that any word or phrase can be used in idiomatic ways, with no change in its underlying meaning, but rather as an abstract extension of the core meaning. Get over X in the above is merely an extension of its normal application of getting over a barrier from the physical to the abstract. Get X over with Y similarly is an abstract application of the concrete construction, found in clauses such as He got the pig over the fence with difficulty and He got over the finishing line first with an extra spurt.
In her introduction to "Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, What this dictionary contains", Rosemary Courtney includes as a third category of the use of verb+preposition complexes:

3. Idioms which are formed from phrasal verbs, such as let the cat out of the bag. These idioms are printed in heavy type. Idioms have a meaning which is different from the meaning of the single words, and usually have a fixed word order.^[4]

Courtney then cites among many other examples in the dictionary such phrases as "to add insult to injury", "to add fuel to the flames", "to leave someone in the lurch", "to scare someone out of their wits", etc. However, it can be argued that the appearance of a verb+preposition complex in such is "coincidental"; it is the whole phrase and its imagery that is the idiom, not the individual words within it.

Phrasal verb patterns

A phrasal verb complex contains one or more prepositional phrases [alt. particle, preposition, adverb], and can enter into transitive and intransitive structures. Like all phrases which involve prepositions, phrasal verb complexes often involve prepositional stranding

The plumber soon sorted out the shower problem/The plumber soon sorted the shower problem out (with object)
The path branched off to the river (no object)
Where did the path branch off to (stranding)

Particle verbs

Phrasal verb complexes that contain a prepositional phrase ("particle") such as up are called by some writers "particle verbs". As they fit into both intransitive and transitive clauses, the presence or absence of a direct object to the verb depends on this. When there is a noun as the direct object, the particle can usually appear on either side of it, although very long noun phrases tend to come after the particle. When the object is a personal pronoun, the particle must always follow:

"When I entered the room he looked up." (intransitive)
Switch off the light. (transitive)
Switch the light off. (transitive)
Switch off the lights in the hallway next to the bedroom in which the president is sleeping. (transitive)
Switch" it/them off. (transitive)
Switch it off. (not *Switch off it.) (transitive)
The smell put them off. (not *put off them) (transitive)
They let him through. (not *they let through him) (transitive)

COMPARISON

In topology and related areas of mathematics comparison of topologies refers to the fact that two topological structures on a given set may stand in relation to each other^{[citation needed]}. The set of all possible topologies on a given set forms a partially ordered set. This order relation can be used to compare the different topologies.

Definition

Let (either the open or closed sets does not matter) τ₁ and τ₂ be two topologies on a set X such that τ₁ is contained in τ₂:

$\tau_1 \subseteq \tau_2$ .

That is, every element of τ₁ is also an element of τ₂. Then the topology τ₁ is said to be a coarser (weaker or smaller) topology than τ₂, and τ₂ is said to be a finer (stronger or larger) topology than τ₁. ^{[nb 1]} If additionally

$\tau_1 \neq \tau_2$

we say τ₁ is strictly coarser than τ₂ and τ₂ is strictly finer than τ₁.^[1]
The binary relation ⊆ defines a partial ordering relation on the set of all possible topologies on X.

Examples

The finest topology on X is the discrete topology; this topology makes all subsets open. The coarsest topology on X is the trivial topology; this topology only admits the null set and the whole space as open sets.
In function spaces and spaces of measures there are often a number of possible topologies. See topologies on the set of operators on a Hilbert space for some intricate relationships.
All possible polar topologies on a dual pair are finer than the weak topology and coarser than the strong topology.

Properties

Let τ₁ and τ₂ be two topologies on a set X. Then the following statements are equivalent:

τ₁ ⊆ τ₂
the identity map id_X : (X, τ₂) → (X, τ₁) is a continuous map.
the identity map id_X : (X, τ₁) → (X, τ₂) is an open map (or, equivalently, a closed map)

Two immediate corollaries of this statement are

A continuous map f : X → Y remains continuous if the topology on Y becomes coarser or the topology on X finer.
An open (resp. closed) map f : X → Y remains open (resp. closed) if the topology on Y becomes finer or the topology on X coarser.

One can also compare topologies using neighborhood bases. Let τ₁ and τ₂ be two topologies on a set X and let B_i(x) be a local base for the topology τ_i at x ∈ X for i = 1,2. Then τ₁ ⊆ τ₂ if and only if for all x ∈ X, each open set U₁ in B₁(x) contains some open set U₂ in B₂(x). Intuitively, this makes sense: a finer topology should have smaller neighborhoods.

Lattice of topologies

The set of all topologies on a set X together with the partial ordering relation ⊆ forms a complete lattice that is also closed under arbitrary intersections. That is, any collection of topologies on X have a meet (or infimum) and a join (or supremum). The meet of a collection of topologies is the intersection of those topologies. The join, however, is not generally the union of those topologies (the union of two topologies need not be a topology) but rather the topology generated by the union.
Every complete lattice is also a bounded lattice, which is to say that it has a greatest and least element. In the case of topologies, the greatest element is the discrete topology and the least element is the trivial topology.

NOUN AND PRONOUN

Common types of pronouns found in the world's languages are as follows:

Personal pronouns stand in place of the names of people or things:
- Subject pronouns are used when the person or thing is the subject of the sentence or clause. English example: I like to eat chips, but she does not.
  - Second person formal and informal pronouns (T-V distinction). For example, vous and tu in French. There is no distinction in modern English though Elizabethan English marked the distinction with "thou" (singular informal) and "you" (plural or singular formal).
  - Inclusive and exclusive "we" pronouns indicate whether the audience is included. There is no distinction in English.
  - Intensive pronouns, also known as emphatic pronouns, re-emphasize a noun or pronoun that has already been mentioned. English uses the same forms as the reflexive pronouns; for example: I did it myself (contrast reflexive use, I did it to myself).
- Object pronouns are used when the person or thing is the object of the sentence or clause. English example: John likes me but not her.
  - Direct and indirect object pronouns. English uses the same oblique form for both; for example: Mary loves him (direct object); Mary sent him a letter (indirect object).
  - Reflexive pronouns are used when a person or thing acts on itself. English example: John cut himself.
  - Reciprocal pronouns refer to a reciprocal relationship. English example: They do not like each other.
- Prepositional pronouns come after a preposition. No distinct forms exist in English; for example: Anna and Maria looked at him.
- Disjunctive pronouns are used in isolation or in certain other special grammatical contexts. No distinct forms exist in English; for example: Who does this belong to? Me.
- Dummy pronouns are used when grammatical rules require a noun (or pronoun), but none is semantically required. English example: It is raining.
- Weak pronouns.
Possessive pronouns are used to indicate possession or ownership.
- In a strict sense, the possessive pronouns are only those that act syntactically as nouns. English example: Those clothes are mine.
- Often, though, the term "possessive pronoun" is also applied to the so-called possessive adjectives (or possessive determiners). For example, in English: I lost my wallet. They are not strictly speaking pronouns^{[citation needed]} because they do not substitute for a noun or noun phrase, and as such, some grammarians classify these terms in a separate lexical category called determiners (they have a syntactic role close to that of adjectives, always qualifying a noun).
Demonstrative pronouns distinguish the particular objects or people that are referred to from other possible candidates. English example: I'll take these.
Indefinite pronouns refer to general categories of people or things. English example: Anyone can do that.
- Distributive pronouns are used to refer to members of a group separately rather than collectively. English example: To each his own.
- Negative pronouns indicate the non-existence of people or things. English example: Nobody thinks that.
Relative pronouns refer back to people or things previously mentioned. English example: People who smoke should quit now.
- Indefinite relative pronouns have some of the properties of both relative pronouns and indefinite pronouns. They have a sense of "referring back", but the person or thing to which they refer has not previously been explicitly named. English example: I know what I like.
Interrogative pronouns ask which person or thing is meant. English example: Who did that?
- In many languages (e.g., Czech, English, French, Interlingua, and Russian), the sets of relative and interrogative pronouns are nearly identical. Compare English: Who is that? (interrogative) to I know who that is. (relative).

Pronouns and determiners

Pronouns and determiners are closely related, and some linguists think pronouns are actually determiners without a noun or a noun phrase.^[1] The following chart shows their relationships in English.

	Pronoun	Determiner
Personal (1st/2nd)	we	we Scotsmen
Possessive	ours	our freedom
Demonstrative	this	this gentleman
Indefinite	some	some frogs
Interrogative	who	which option

The views of different schools

Pronouns have been classified as one of the parts of speech since at least the 2nd century BC when they were included in the Greek treatise Art of Grammar. Objections to this approach have appeared among grammatical theories in the 20th century. Their grammatical heterogeneity, many-sided pronouns were underlined, which were classified as follows:^{[clarification needed]}

"indicative words" (Karl Brugmann, Karl Bühler, Uriel Weinreich);
"indexes" or "indicators" (Charles Sanders Peirce, William Edward Collinson);
"words with changeable signification" (Adolf Noreen);
"moveable identifiers" (Otto Jespersen, Roman Jakobson);
"updating" or "means of transferring from language to speech" (Charles Bally, Émile Benveniste);
"words of subjective-objective lexical meaning" (Alexey Peshkovsky);
"word remnants" or "substitutes" (Lev Shcherba, Leonard Bloomfield, Zellig Harris);
"represents" (Ferdinand Brunot);
"survivals of special part of speech" (Viktor Vinogradov), etc.

The Azerbaijan Linguistic School denies independence of pronoun, it is not considered to be an independent part of speech, because relations between pronouns and other parts of speech are not equal and mutually exclusive, since the properties of pronouns overlap with other parts of speech as a subset of them. But this contradicts the second law of "logic division" (which reads: "Members of division should be mutually exclusive, i.e. should not overlap"). Dismemberment of all major parts of speech first to general and particular and then to abstract and concrete types shows that the place of abstract-and-general form of each part of speech is empty. The conclusion is that this is a pronoun which is traditionally (by historical inertia or under influence authority of ancient schools) separated from the other parts of speech, gathered in one class and called a pronoun. On the basis of this logic this school considers it appropriate to distribute pronouns among other parts of speech.^[2]^[3]

Modal auxiliary

Modal auxiliary verbs give more information about the function of the main verb that follows it. Although having a great variety of communicative functions, these functions can all be related to a scale ranging from possibility ("may") to necessity ("must"). Within this scale there are two functional divisions:

epistemic, concerned with the theoretical possibility of propositions being true or not true (including likelihood, and certainty); and
deontic, concerned with possibility and necessity in terms of freedom to act (including ability, permission, and duty)

The following sentences illustrate the two uses of must:

epistemic: You must be starving. (e.g., "It is necessarily the case that you are starving.")
deontic: You must leave now. (e.g., "You are required to leave now.")
ambiguous: You must speak Spanish.
- epistemic: "It is surely the case that you speak Spanish (after having lived in Spain for ten years)."
- deontic: "It is a requirement that you speak Spanish (if you want to get a job in Spain)."

Epistemic modals can be analyzed as raising verbs, while deontic modals can be analyzed as control verbs.
Another use of modal auxiliaries is to indicate "dynamic modality", which refers to properties such as ability or disposition.^[2] Some examples of this are "can" in English, "können" in German, and "possum" in Latin. For example, "I can say that in English," "Ich kann das auf Deutsch sagen," and "Illud Latine dicere possum."

List of modal auxiliaries in English

The following table lists the modal auxiliary verbs of standard English. Most of them appear more than once based upon the distinction between deontic and epistemic modality:

Modal auxiliary	meaning contribution	Example
can₁	deontic/dynamic modality	She can really sing.
can₂	epistemic modality	That can indeed help.
could₁	deontic modality	He could swim when he was young.
could₂	epistemic modality	That could happen soon.
may₁	deontic modality	May I stay?
may₂	epistemic modality	That may be a problem.
might	epistemic modality	The weather might improve.
must₁	deontic modality	Sam must go to school.
must₂	epistemic modality	It must be hot outside.
shall	deontic modality	You shall not pass.
should₁	deontic modality	You should stop that.
should₂	epistemic modality	That should be suprising.
will	epistemic modality	She will try to lie.
would	epistemic modality	Nothing would accomplish that.

The verbs in this list all have the following characteristics:

They are auxiliary verbs, which means they allow subject-auxiliary inversion and can take the negation not,
They convey functional meaning,
They are defective insofar as they cannot be inflected, nor do they appear in non-finite form (i.e. not as infinitives, gerunds, or participles),
They are nevertheless always finite and thus appear as the root verb in their clause, and
They subcategorize for an infinitive, i.e. they take an infinitive as their complement

The verbs/expressions dare, ought to, had better, and need not behave like modal auxiliaries to a large extent, although they are not productive in the role to the same extent as those listed here. Furthermore, there are numerous other verbs that can be viewed as modal verbs insofar as they clearly express modality in the same way that the verbs in this list do, e.g. appear, have to, seem, etc. In the strict sense, though, these other verbs do not qualify as modal verbs in English because they do not allow subject-auxiliary inversion, nor do they allow negation with not. If, however, one defines modal verb entirely in terms of meaning contribution, then these other verbs would also be modals and so the list here would have to be greatly expanded.

Meaning contribution

A modal auxiliary verb gives more information about the function of the main verb that follows it. Although they have a great variety of communicative uses, these functions can all be related to a scale ranging from possibility (may) to necessity (must). Within this scale there are two functional divisions:

Epistemic modality: concerned with the theoretical possibility of propositions being true or not true (including likelihood, and certainty); and
Deontic modality: concerned with possibility and necessity in terms of freedom to act (including ability, permission, and duty)

The following sentences illustrate the two uses of must:

Deontic: You must leave now. = 'You are required to leave now.'
Epistemic: You must be starving. = 'It is necessarily the case that you are starving.'

Ambiguous

Deontic: You must speak Spanish. = 'It is a requirement that you speak Spanish (if you want to get a job in Spain).'
Epistemic: You must speak Spanish. = 'It is surely the case that you speak Spanish (after having lived in Spain for ten years).'

Epistemic modals can be analyzed as raising verbs, while deontic modals can be analyzed as control verbs.
Another use of modal auxiliaries is to indicate dynamic modality, which refers to properties such as ability or disposition.^[3] Some examples of this are can in English, können in German, and possum in Latin. For example, I can say that in English, Ich kann das auf Deutsch sagen, and Illud Latine dicere possum.

the sun and the wind

The story concerns a competition between the North wind and the Sun to decide which is the stronger of the two. The challenge was to make a passing traveler remove his cloak. However hard the North Wind blew, the traveler only wrapped his cloak tighter, but when the Sun shone, the traveler was overcome with heat and had to take his cloak off.
The fable was well known in Ancient Greece and was alluded to in an anecdote concerning the dramatist Sophocles. After persuading a lad to have sex with him,

This boy laid his own cloak on the ground under them, and they wrapped themselves in Sophocles' cape. After the act the boy snatched Sophocles' cape and went off leaving Sophocles his own boyish cloak. The incident was widely reported. Euripides heard of it and made a joke out of it, saying that he had had that boy too and it did not cost him anything; Sophocles had let himself go and had paid with ridicule. When Sophocles heard that, he composed an epigram against Euripides in the following sense, alluding to the story of the North Wind and the Sun, and at the same time satirising Euripides' adulteries:

It was the Sun, and not a boy, whose heat stripped me naked;

As for you, Euripides, when you were kissing someone else's wife

The North Wind screwed you. You are unwise, you who sow

In another's field, to accuse Eros of being a snatch-thief.^[2]

The Latin version of the fable first appears centuries later in Avianus as De Vento et Sole (Of the wind and the sun, Fable 4);^[3] early versions in English and Johann Gottfried Herder's poetic version in German (Wind und Sonne) also give it as such. It is only in mid-Victorian times that the title "The North Wind and the Sun" begins to be used. In fact the Avianus poem refers to the characters as Boreas and Phoebus, the gods of the north wind and the sun, and it is under the title Phébus et Borée that it appears in La Fontaine's Fables (VI.3).
Victorian versions give the moral as "Persuasion is better than force", but it has been put in different ways at other times. In the Barlow edition of 1667, Aphra Behn teaches the Stoic lesson that there should be moderation in everything: "In every passion moderation choose,/For all extremes do bad effects produce",^[4] while La Fontaine's conclusion is that "Gentleness does more than violence" (Fables VI.3). In the 18th century, Herder comes to the theological conclusion that, while superior force leaves us cold, the warmth of Christ's love dispels it,^[5] and Walter Crane's limerick version of 1887 gives a psychological interpretation, "True strength is not bluster". Most of these examples draw a moral lesson, but La Fontaine hints at the political application that is present also in Avianus' conclusion: "They cannot win who start with threats". There is evidence that this reading has had an explicit influence on the diplomacy of modern times: in South Korea's Sunshine Policy, for instance, or Japanese relations with the military regime in Burma

present tense

The English present tense can be combined with aspects in the following verbal constructions:
The present simple or simple present is used in several ways:

to describe both habits and or routines (habitual aspect) (I eat breakfast every morning at 6:30; I go to work every day), and general facts or the truth (The earth revolves around the sun);

to present thoughts, feelings, and other unchanging states (stative aspect) (I think so; I like it; It is hot; The sun always shines in the desert);

to indicate scheduled events in the near future (so that the simple “present” verb form actually indicates future tense) (I take the train tomorrow at 6:00);

to indicate events at any time in the future in a dependent clause (I’ll retire when I reach age 65);

to provide narratives such as instructional narratives (Now I mix the ingredients; now I put the pan in the oven);

to narrate past events (the historical present) for stylistic effect.

I never come to school by cycle.

He always forgets to do his homework.

I never catch the late bus home.

present time

The present is contrasted with the past and the future. Modern physics has not yet been able to explain the perceived aspect of 'the present' as 'eliminator of possibilities' that transfers future into past. A complicating factor is that whilst a given observer would describe 'the present' as a spatial structure with a zero-length time lapse, other observers would associate both time and space to this structure and therefore disagree on what constitutes 'the present'.
The direct experience of the present for each human is that it is what is here, now. Direct experience is of course subjective by definition yet, in this case, this same direct experience is true for all humans. For all of us, 'here' means 'where I am' and 'now' means 'when I am'. Thus, the common repeatable experience is that the present is inextricably linked to oneself.
In the time aspect, the conventional concept of 'now' is that it is some tiny point on a continuous timeline which separates past from future. It is not clear, however, that there is a universal timeline or whether, as relativity seems to indicate, the timeline is inextricably linked to the observer. Thus, is 'now' for me the same time as 'now' for you on a universal timeline, assuming a universal timeline exists? Adding to the confusion, in the physics view, there is no demonstrable reason why time should move in any one particular direction.
Adding substance to the supposition that the timeline view of 'now' may not hold the full picture, the qualities of 'now' or the 'present' in the human direct experience are very different from the qualities of past and future available through memory or anticipation. In the human direct experience, 'now' has a certain aliveness, reality and immediacy not present in our concepts of past and future. Indeed, any experience is always happening 'now', even a re-living of some past event. Thus, there is a deep philosophical case for saying that the present moment is all there ever is, from moment to moment.
When comparing time in places separated by great distances, the notion of present becomes more subjective. For example, we visually perceive stars to be where they were when the light now reaching our eyes was emitted, because even though light travels at approximately 300,000,000 metres per second (980,000,000 ft/s), it takes many years to reach us from distant sources. Thus, light travel time must be taken into account in such time comparisons.
When used in the term "Before Present" (BP), as used in expressing ages or dates determined by radiocarbon dating, "Present" is defined as AD 1950.

The present in Buddhism

Buddhism and many of its associated paradigms emphasize the importance of living in the present moment — being fully aware of what is happening, and not dwelling on the past or worrying about the future.^[7] This does not mean that they encourage hedonism, but merely that constant focus on one's current position in space and time (rather than future considerations, or past reminiscence) will aid one in relieving suffering. They teach that those who live in the present moment are the happiest.^[8] A number of meditative techniques aim to help the practiser live in the present moment.

Christianity and eternity

For some Christians God is viewed as being outside of time and, from the divine perspective past, present and future are actualized in the now of eternity. This trans-temporal conception of God has been proposed as a solution to the problem of divine foreknowledge (i.e. how can God know what we will do in the future without us being determined to do it) since at least Boethius.^[9] Thomas Aquinas offers the metaphor of a watchman, representing God, standing on a height looking down on a valley to a road where past present and future, represented by the individuals and their actions strung out along its length, are all visible simultaneously to God.^[10] Therefore, God's knowledge is not tied to any particular date.^[11]

Philosophy and science

Philosophical problem

"The present" raises the difficult question: "How is it that all sentient beings experience now at the same time?"^[12] There is no logical reason why this should be the case and no easy answer to the question. For example, say somebody named John is experiencing a great deal of pain. John's friend Sarah takes pity on John because of John's situation. The problem is: is it logical for Sarah to feel bad for John at present, when there is no way to prove that both John and Sarah experience the same temporal existence? (See also Solipsism and Philosophy of mind.)

Special Relativity's "present"

A visualisation of the present (dark blue plane) and past and future light cones in 2D space.

It follows from Albert Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity that there is no such thing as absolute simultaneity. When care is taken to operationalise "the present", it follows that the events that can be labeled as "simultaneous" with a given event, can not be in direct cause-effect relationship. Such collections of events are perceived differently by different observers. Instead, when focusing on "now" as the events perceived directly, not as a recollection or a speculation, for a given observer "now" takes the form of the observer's past light cone. The light cone of a given event is objectively defined as the collection of events in causal relationship to that event, but each event has a different associated light cone. One has to conclude that in relativistic models of physics there is no place for "the present" as an absolute element of reality. Einstein phrased this as: "People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion".^[13]

Today vs. Now

"Today" signifies a "day" in a 24-hour interval to signify one's stance within the plane of time, this is contrary to "now", because "now" has no definite measure for its own duration. On the graph of Space-Time, the present can appear to be infinitely small, or account for a large portion of a sequence.

Senin, 16 Juli 2012

GERUND

In linguistics, the term "gerund" denotes certain types of non-finite verb forms in various languages.

As applied to English, it refers to the use of a verb (in its -ing form) as a noun (for example, the verb "learning" in the sentence "Learning is an easy process for some").^[1]
As applied to French, it refers either to the adverbial participle—also called the gerundive—or to the present adjectival participle.
As applied to Latin, its form is based on the participle ending, similarly to English. The –ns ending is replaced with -ndus, and the preceding ā or ē is shortened. However, the gerund is only ever seen in the accusative form ("ndum"), genitive form ("ndi"), dative form ("ndo") or ablative form ("ndo") (see Latin conjugation.) If the gerund is needed in the nominative form, the present infinitive is used instead.
As applied to Macedonian, it refers to the verb noun formed by adding the suffix -ње (-nje) to the verb form, like in јаде (jade, he eats) — јадење (jadenje, eating).
As applied to Japanese, it designates verb and verbals adjective forms in dictionary form paired with the referral particle no, which turns the verbal into a concept or property noun.
As applied to Portuguese, it refers to an adverbial participle (a verbal adverb), called gerúndio.
As applied to Romanian, it refers to an adverbial participle (a verbal adverb), called the gerunziu, formed by appending -ând or -ind, to the verb stem, like in cântând/fugind".
As applied to Spanish, it refers to an adverbial participle (a verbal adverb), called in Spanish the gerundio.
As applied to Turkish, it refers to the Turkish verbal nouns formed by appending -ma or -me, depending on vowel harmony, to the verb stem, like in "Yapma değil, Avrupa malı bu." ("It is not a fake, but produced in Europe" - not to confuse with the negational -ma postfix.) The Turkish gerund is rather similar in meaning and use to the English gerund.
As applied to Arabic, it refers to the verb's action noun, known as the masdar form (Arabic: المصدر). This form ends in a tanwin and is generally the equivalent of the -ing ending in English.
As applied to Hebrew, it refers either to the verb's action noun, or to the part of the infinitive following the infinitival prefix (also called the infinitival construct).
As applied to West Frisian, it refers to one of two verb forms frequently referred to as infinitives, this one ending in -n. It shows up in nominalizations and is selected by perception verbs.

passive voice

Promotion of other objects

One non-canonical use of English's passive is to promote an object other than a direct object. It is usually possible in English to promote indirect objects as well. For example:

John gave Mary a book. → Mary was given a book.
John gave Mary a book. → Mary was given a book by John.

In the active form, gave is the verb; John is its subject, Mary its indirect object, and a book its direct object. In the passive forms, the indirect object has been promoted and the direct object has been left in place. (In A book was given to Mary, the direct object is promoted and the indirect object left in place. In this respect, English resembles dechticaetiative languages.)
It is also possible, in some cases, to promote the object of a preposition:

They talked about the problem. → The problem was talked about.

In the passive form here, the preposition is "stranded"; that is, it is not followed by an object.

Promotion of content clauses

It is possible to promote a content clause that serves as a direct object. In this case, however, the clause typically does not change its position in the sentence, and an expletive it takes the normal subject position:

They say that he left. → It is said that he left.

Stative passives

The passives described above are all eventive (or dynamic) passives. Stative (or static, or resultative) passives also exist in English; rather than describing an action, they describe the result of an action. English does not usually distinguish between the two. For example:

The window was broken.

This sentence has two different meanings, roughly the following:

[Someone] broke the window.
The window was not intact.

The former meaning represents the canonical, eventive passive; the latter, the stative passive. (The terms eventive and stative/resultative refer to the tendencies of these forms to describe events and resultant states, respectively. The terms can be misleading, however, as the canonical passive of a stative verb is not a stative passive, even though it describes a state.)
Some verbs do not form stative passives. In some cases, this is because distinct adjectives exist for this purpose, such as with the verb open:

The door was opened. → [Someone] opened the door.
The door was open. → The door was in the open state.

Adjectival passives

Adjectival passives are not true passives; they occur when a participial adjective (an adjective derived from a participle) is used predicatively (see Adjective). For example:

She was relieved to find her car.

Here, relieved is an ordinary adjective, though it derives from the past participle of relieve,^[16] and that past participle may be used in canonical passives:

He was relieved of duty.

In some cases, the line between an adjectival passive and a stative passive may be unclear, as in:

The door was closed. (= The door was closed by [someone] = [Someone] closed the door OR = The door was not open.)

Passives without active counterparts

In a few cases, passive constructions retain all the sense of the passive voice, but do not have immediate active counterparts. For example:

He was rumored to be a war veteran. ← *[Someone] rumored him to be a war veteran.

(The asterisk here denotes an ungrammatical construction.) Similarly:

It was rumored that he was a war veteran. ← *[Someone] rumored that he was a war veteran.

In both of these examples, the active counterpart was once possible, but has fallen out of use.

Double passives

It is possible but it is not necessary for a verb in the passive voice—especially an object-raising verb—to take an infinitive complement that is also in the passive voice:

The project is expected to be completed in the next year.

Commonly, either or both verbs may be moved into the active voice:

[Someone] expects the project to be completed in the next year.
[Someone] is expected to complete the project in the next year.
[Someone] expects [someone] to complete the project in the next year.

In some cases, a similar construction may occur with a verb that is not object-raising in the active voice:

?The project will be attempted to be completed in the next year. ← *[Someone] will attempt the project to be completed in the next year. ← [Someone] will attempt to complete the project in the next year.

(The question mark here denotes a questionably-grammatical construction.) In this example, the object of the infinitive has been promoted to the subject of the main verb, and both the infinitive and the main verb have been moved to the passive voice. The American Heritage Book of English Usage declares this unacceptable,^[17] but it is nonetheless recommended in a variety of contexts.^[18]

Passives without a past participle

Rarely, the passive voice can be expressed without the use of the past participle, as in^[19]

That rash needs looking at by a specialist.

Here "looking at by a specialist" is a noun phrase serving as the object of the active verb "needs"; in the noun phrase the implied subject is rash, which is the patient of the verb look at, and the agent specialist appears in a prepositional "by" phrase

The house at the end of the street is red.

The words in bold form a phrase; together they act like a noun. This phrase can be further broken down; a prepositional phrase functioning as an adjective can be identified:

at the end of the street

Further, a smaller prepositional phrase can be identified inside this greater prepositional phrase:

of the street

And within the greater prepositional phrase, one can identify a noun phrase:

the end of the street

Phrases can be identified by constituency tests such as proform substitution (=replacement). For instance, the prepositional phrase at the end of the street could be replaced by an adjective such as nearby: the nearby house or even the house nearby. The end of the street could also be replaced by another noun phrase, such as the crossroads to produce the house at the crossroads.

Heads and dependents

Most phrases have an important word defining the type and linguistic features of the phrase. This word is the head of the phrase and gives its name to the phrase category.^[2] The heads in the following phrases are in bold:

too slowly - Adverb phrase (AdvP)

very happy - Adjective phrase (AP)

the massive dinosaur - Noun phrase (NP)

at lunch - Preposition phrase (PP)

watch TV - Verb phrase (VP)

The head can be distinguished from its dependents (the rest of the phrase other than the head) because the head of the phrase determines many of the grammatical features of the phrase as a whole. The examples just given show the five most commonly acknowledged types of phrases. Further phrase types can be assumed, although doing so is not common. For instance one might acknowledge subordinator phrases:

before that happened - Subordinator phrase (SP)

This "phrase" is more commonly classified as a full subordinate clause and therefore many grammars would not label it as a phrase. If one follows the reasoning of heads and dependents, however, then subordinate clauses should indeed qualify as phrases. Most theories of syntax see most if not all phrases as having a head. Sometimes, however, non-headed phrases are acknowledged. If a phrase lacks a head, it is known as exocentric, whereas phrases with heads are endocentric.

Representing phrases

Many theories of syntax and grammar represent sentence structure using trees. The trees provide schematic illustrations of how the words of sentences are grouped. These representations show the words, phrases, and at times clauses that make up sentences.^[3] Any word combination that corresponds to a complete subtree can be seen as a phrase. There are two competing principles for producing trees, constituency and dependency. Both of these principles are illustrated here using the example sentence from above. The constituency-based tree is on the left, and the dependency-based tree on the right: