Syntactic and semantic features of resulting copular verbs in english and their vietnamese equivalents in a literature work

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY
I, the undersigned, hereby certify my authority of the study project report
entitled
SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC FEATURES
OF RESULTING COPULAR VERBS IN ENGLISHAND THEIR
VIETNAMESE EQUIVALENTS IN A LITERATURE WORK
CÁC ĐẶC ĐIỂM VỀ CÚ PHÁP VÀ NGỮ NGHĨA CỦA ĐỘNG TỪ
NỐI TRONG TIẾNG ANH VÀ TƢƠNG ĐƢƠNG TRONG TIẾNG VIỆT TRONG
MỘT TÁC PHẨM VĂN HỌC

submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in
English Language. Except where the reference is indicated, no other person‘s
work has been used without due acknowledgement in the text of the thesis.
Hanoi, 2020

Le Phuong Dung
Approved by
SUPERVISOR

Dr. Dang Ngoc Huong
Date: 26/11/2020
i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis could not have been completed without help and support
from a number of people.
First, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Dang
Ngoc Huong, my supervisor, who has given me great help with this paper
preparation. Without his experienced guidance, valuable suggestions and
dutiful supervision, my research would be far from finished.

I would also like to acknowledge my debt of gratitude to Assoc. Prof
Dr. Hoang Tuyet Minh and the staff members of Post-graduate Department
and the lecturers at Faculty of Foreign Languages – Ha Noi Open University
for their valuable lectures, which laid the foundation of this thesis, and for their
knowledge as well as their sympathy.
I am also grateful to the Thanh Hoa students in group of English
language courses K18M, who helpep me overcome difficulties to complete my
thesis.
Last but not least, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my
beloved parents, my brothers, whose support and continual encouragement have
been indispensable for the fulfillment of this challenging work.
This thesis cannot avoid limitation, so I wish to receive comments and
opinions to make it better.

ii


ABSTRACT
The issue of resulting copular verbs in English and in Vietnamese is a very
complex one and there are many different views of linguistists. The focus of this
thesis is to study on syntactic and semantic fetures of resulting copular verbs and
their Vietnamese equivalents in Vietnamese in a literature work. The research was
carried out to answer the research questions:
What are syntactic and semantic features of resulting copular verbs in
English?
What are the the similarities and differences between resulting copular
verbs in English and their Vietnamses equivalents in a literature work?
What implication is drawn for learning resulting copular verbs
effectively?
The differences between the meanings and uses of the different

structures are not easy to analyse and describe clearly. The study attempts to
provide readers, particularly students of English, solutions to their problems when
using resulting copular verbs. So, in the last chapter, the common errors and
mistakes made by Vietnamese learners are highlighted. Then the suggestions
for each problem are presented with examples to help students understand and
overcome their difficulties in using resulting copular verbs. And the implications for
teaching English grammar better are also given

iii


SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

A
C
Cl.

Adverbial
Complement
Clause

HN
Inf

Head noun
Infinitive

Int.

Interrogative

N
No.

Noun
Nominal

NP
O
Od

Noun phrase
Object
Direct object

Oi
Re.

Indirect object

S
V
RCVs
VP

Relative
Subject
Verb
Resulting copular
verbs

Verb phrase

iv


v


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
Certificate of originality
Acknowledgement
Abstract
Table of contents

Page number
i
ii
iii
iv

1.1 Rationale

1
1

1.2 Aims and objectives

1

1.3 Research questions

2

1.4 Methodology and methods of the study

2

1.5 Scopes of the study

2

1.6 Significance of the study

2

1.7 Structure of the study

2
4

2.1.

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Previous studies

2.2.
2.3.
2.4.

2.2 Theoretical background
2.2.1 Theory of syntax
2.2.2 Theorry of semantics

4
4
8

2.5.

2.2.3 Overview of English verbs
2.2.3.1 Verbs Definition
2.2.3.2 Classification
2.2.4 Copular verbs

11
11
14
14

2.2.4.1 Definition
2.2.4.2 Classification
2.2.4.3 Chief Patterns of Copular Verbs
2.2.4.4 Rules of Realization
2.4 Summary

14
18
20
21

26

Chapter 3: WHAT ARE THE SIMILARITIES AND
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RESULTING COPULAR
VERBS IN ENGLISH AND THEIR VIETNAMESE
EQUIVALENTS IN A LITERATURE WORK?
3.1 Overview
3.2. Syntactic features of resulting copular verbs

27
27

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
1.4.
1.5.
1.6.
1.7.

2.6.

4

vi


3.2.1. Syntactic Features of RCVs in English

27

3.2.1.1 General Syntactic Features of RCVs in English

27

3.2.1.2. Specific Syntactic Features of RCVs inEnglish

28

3.2.2. Syntactic Features of RCVS in Vietnamese
3.3. Semantic features of resulting copular verbs
3.3.1. SemanticFeatures of RCVs in English

34
39
39

3.3.1.1 RCVs denoting the process of changing
3.3.1.2 RCVs denoting the results of changing

41
41

3.3.1.3 RCVs expressing natutal changes

41

3.3.1.4 RCVs expressing social changes

3.3.1.5 RCVs expressing changes in people's physical state

42
42

3.3.1.6 RCVs describing changes in people's mental state
3.3.1.7 RCVs designating changes of people's psychological
state
3.3.1.8 RCVs describing gradual changes in attitude
3.3.1.9 RCVs indicating a change of politics

42
42

3.3.1.10 RCVs talking about a change of religion
3.3.1.11 RCVs indicating a change of occupation
3.3.1.12. RCVs describing the change of quality
3.3.1.13 RCVs describing changes of colour
3.3.1.14. RCVs describing a change to a better condition
3.3.1.15. RCVs expressing a specified state or condition that
the subject enters or reaches
3.3.1.16. RCVs talking about changes of deliberate actions

43
43
43
44
44
44

3.3.1.17 RCVs reporting an assessment
3.4 Frequency of RCVs investigated
3.4.1 Frequency of English RCVs
3.4.2 Frequency of Vietnamese RCVs
3.5 Detailed examples in ―The call of the wild‖ by Jack
Lodon
3.6 Similarities and differences between English RCVs and
Vietnamese RCVs

45
47
47
48
48

3.6.1 Similarities and Differences in Syntactic Features
Between English RCVs and Vietnamese ones.

54

42
43

45

54

vii

3.6.2 Similarities and Differences in Semantic Features

55

Between English RCVs and Vietnamese ones
3.7. Summary

57

Chapter 4: CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

59
62
64

REFERNCES
APPENDICES

viii


Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. RATIONALE
The verb is perhaps the most important part of the sentence. A verb or
compound verb asserts something about the subject of the sentence and express
actions, events, or states of being. The verb or compound verb is the critical element
of the predicate of a sentence.Being aware of its importance will help Vietnamese
learners overcome difficulties when learning and using English verbs.
World languages, especially English and Vietnamese, are different, so
transferring an idea from English into Vietnamese and vice versa in some cases is

not a simple job. For example, in Vietnamese, we say ―Anh ta trở nên giàu có‖ or
―Anh ta trở nên mù lòa‖. In both cases, the verbs are the same regardless of the
adjectives following them “giàu có” and “mù lòa”. However, in English, we say
―He has got rich.‖ but ―He went blind‖. The verbs in the two sentences are
different.
The verbs highlighted above are used to express the result of the process of
change so they are called Resulting Copular Verbs (RCVs). Despite this general
similarity, these RCVs differ greatly in their specific meanings, collocational
preferences, and register distributions. In other words, they are different in syntactic
and semantic features, therefore, they cause difficulties to Vietnamese learners of
English and translation work. For example: You getyoungereveryday.
In that sentence, we can use ―become” instead of “get” to express the process of
change but “get” is less formal than “become”.
What is more, in the practice of teaching English as a foreign language, we
have found out that Vietnamese learners often have difficulties when dealing with
RCVs. For instance, a number of Vietnamese learners of English may make
sentences like “Mary became angrily.” while the right sentence must be “Mary
became angry.” or they have encountered more challenges when they translate the
following sentences into Vietnamese:
(*) It went a strange colour. (Nó hóa thành một màu kỳ lạ.)
(**) Her finger went blue with cold.
(Ngón tay cơ ta tê cóng vì lạnh.
“go” in example (*) means “become” not “move or travel” as its common
meaning. However, the Vietnamese translational equivalents of “go” can be
omitted as in example(**).

1


Here and there, there are many studies on verbs with certain linguistic units.

However, there are not many studies of Resulting Copular Verbs . Thus, the topic ―
Syntactic and semantic features of Resulting Copular Verbs in English and their
Vietnamese equivalents in a literature work‖ is chosen for my study. Hopeful, the
result of the study will be useful for learners of English and Vietnamese and
contribute a small part into the teaching and learning English and Vietnamese as a
foreign language in Vietnam.
1.2. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
AIMS:To help learners of English master Resulting Copular Verbs in
English and their Vietnamese equivalents in terms of syntactic and semantic
features effectively.
OBJECTIVES:
- To identify the syntactic and semantic features of English Resulting
Copular Verbs .
- To find out the similarities and differences between Resulting Copular
Verbs in English and their Vietnamese equivalents.
- To give some implications for learning Resulting Copular Verbs
effectively.
1.3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What are syntactic and semantic features of Resulting Copular
Verbs in English?
2.What are the the similarities and differences between Resulting
Copular Verbs in English and their Vietnamses equivalents in a literature work?
3. What implication is drawn for learning Resulting Copular Verbs
effectively?
1.4. THE SCOPES OF THE STUDY
- To differentiate English Resulting Copular Verbs and their Vietnamese
equivalents according to their experiential meanings concentrating on the most
common structures and patterns of Resulting Copular Verbs .
- To make contrastive analysis of English Resulting Copular Verbs and their
complementation and the Vietnamese equivalents.

2


- To evaluate the English - Vietnamese translation in some bilingual books available
and teaching English at upper-secondary school.
1.5. STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY
The study consists of four chapters namely: Introduction, Literature review, Finding
discussion, and Conclusion, of which major contents are as follows:
Chapter 1 presents the rationale for the research, the aims, the objectives,
thescope of the research, the significances of research as well as the structural
organization of the thesis.
Chapter 2 discusses some previous studies on different kinds of verb in
Englishand Vietnamese and the theoretical background about ditransitive verb
group.
Chapter 3 presents the syntactic and semantic features of Resulting Copular
Verbsin English and Vietnamese and finds out the similarities and differences
between them.
Chapter 4 makes conclusions on each of the research objectives,
implications,limitations and suggestions for further research. References come at
the end of the study.

3


Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. PREVIOUS STUDIES
Biber, Conrad and Leech present the copula BE and other verbs that can
function as CVs. The frequency and the most common complements of each
copular verb are alsomentioned.

Downing and Locke express the processes of being and becoming, in
which the resulting attribute isdiscussed.
Quirk and Greenbaum and assume that copular verbs or linking verbs, are
followed by subject complement or a predication adjunct. They also state the
two main classes of CVs in their works.
Nguyen Kim Than presents copular verbs in his work. He also stated that
CVs are often followed by subject complement.
Diep Quang Ban and, Hoang Van Thung, and Le Bien have considered
copular verbs and named them Dependent Verbs. They belong to the sub-group
of relational verbs.
Ton Nu Xuan Phuong concentrates on the real situation on teaching and
learning copular verbs and copulative structures in ESP (English for Specific
Purposes) classes.
Tran Thi Yen Hoa concentrates on how first-year students at College of
Foreign Languages, Danang University understood the concept of copular verb
and how it was used.
In fact, there have been a lot of studies related to CVs so far. However, the
syntactic and semantic features of CVs, especially the RCVs, as well as a
comparison between English RCVs and Vietnamese ones have not been dealt with
yet. For this reason, thestudy entitled “Syntactic and semantic features of
Resulting Copular Verbs in English and their Vietnamese equivalents in a
literature work” is intended to investigate the syntactic and semantic features of
RCVs in English and in Vietnamese, contributing useful knowledge to the
teaching, learning English and to the translation work.
2.2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.2.1Theory of syntax
In linguistics, syntax (/ˈsɪntæks/) is the set of rules, principles, and processes that
govern the structure of sentences (sentence structure) in a given language, usually

4

including word order. The term syntax is also used to refer to the study of such
principles and processes.
There are a number of theoretical approaches to the discipline of syntax. One school
of thought, founded in the works of Derek Bickerton, sees syntax as a branch of
biology, since it conceives of syntax as the study of linguistic knowledge as
embodied in the human mind. Other linguists (e.g., Gerald Gazdar) take a
more Platonistic view, since they regard syntax to be the study of an abstract formal
system. Yet others (e.g., Joseph Greenberg) consider syntax a taxonomical device to
reach broad generalizations across languages.
Dependency grammar
Dependency grammar (DG) is a class of modern grammatical theories that are all
based on the dependency relation (as opposed to the constituency relation of phrase
structure) and that can be traced back primarily to the work of Lucien Tesnière.
Dependency is the notion that linguistic units, e.g. words, are connected to each
other by directed links. The (finite) verb is taken to be the structural center of clause
structure. All other syntactic units (words) are either directly or indirectly connected
to the verb in terms of the directed links, which are called dependencies. DGs are
distinct from phrase structure grammars, since DGs lack phrasal nodes, although
they acknowledge phrases. A dependency structure is determined by the relation
between a word (a head) and its dependents. Dependency structures are flatter than
phrase structures in part because they lack a finite verb phrase constituent, and they
are thus well suited for the analysis of languages with free word order, such
as Czech or Warlpiri.
Dependency grammar is an approach to sentence structure where syntactic units
are arranged according to the dependency relation, as opposed to the constituency
relation of phrase structure grammars. Dependencies are directed links between
words. The (finite) verb is seen as the root of all clause structure and all the other
words in the clause are either directly or indirectly dependent on this root. Some

prominent dependency-based theories of syntax are:
• Recursive categorical syntax, or Algebraic syntax
• Functional generative description
• Meaning–text theory
•
•

Operator grammar
Word grammar

5


Lucien Tesnière (1893–1954) is widely seen as the father of modern dependencybased theories of syntax and grammar. He argued vehemently against the binary
division of the clause into subject and predicate that is associated with the grammars
of his day (S → NP VP) and which remains at the core of most phrase structure
grammars. In the place of this division, he positioned the verb as the root of all
clause structure.
Categorial grammar
Categorial grammar is a term used for a family of formalisms in natural
language syntax motivated by the principle of compositionality and organized
according to the view that syntactic constituents should generally combine
as functions or according to a function-argument relationship. Most versions of
categorial grammar analyze sentence structure in terms of constituencies (as
opposed to dependencies) and are therefore phrase structure grammars (as opposed
to dependency grammars).
Categorial grammar is an approach that attributes the syntactic structure not to
rules of grammar, but to the properties of the syntactic categories themselves. For
example, rather than asserting that sentences are constructed by a rule that combines
a noun phrase (NP) and a verb phrase (VP) (e.g., the phrase structure rule S → NP

VP), in categorial grammar, such principles are embedded in the category of
the head word itself. So the syntactic category for an intransitive verb is a complex
formula representing the fact that the verb acts as a function word requiring an NP
as an input and produces a sentence level structure as an output. This complex
category is notated as (NP\S) instead of V. NP\S is read as "a category that searches
to the left (indicated by \) for an NP (the element on the left) and outputs a sentence
(the element on the right)." The category of transitive verb is defined as an element
that requires two NPs (its subject and its direct object) to form a sentence. This is
notated as (NP/(NP\S)) which means "a category that searches to the right
(indicated by /) for an NP (the object), and generates a function (equivalent to the
VP) which is (NP\S), which in turn represents a function that searches to the left for
an NP and produces a sentence."
Functional grammars
Functionalist models of grammar study the form–function interaction by performing
a structural and a functional analysis.
 Functional discourse grammar (Dik)

6




Prague linguistic circle



Role and reference grammar (RRG)



Systemic functional grammar

Generative grammar
The hypothesis of generative grammar is that language is a biological structure. The
difference between structural–functional and generative models is that, in
generative grammar, the object is placed into the verb phrase. Generative grammar
is meant to be used to describe all human language and to predict whether any given
utterance in a hypothetical language would sound correct to a speaker of that
language (versus constructions which no human language would use). This
approach to language was pioneered by Noam Chomsky. Most generative theories
(although not all of them) assume that syntax is based upon the constituent structure
of sentences. Generative grammars are among the theories that focus primarily on
the form of a sentence, rather than its communicative function.
Among the many generative theories of linguistics, the Chomskyan theories are:

Transformational grammar (TG) (Original theory of generative syntax laid
out by Chomsky in Syntactic Structures in 1957).

Government and binding theory (GB) (revised theory in the tradition of TG
developed mainly by Chomsky in the 1970s and 1980s)

Minimalist program (MP) (a reworking of the theory out of the GB
framework published by Chomsky in 1995)
Other theories that find their origin in the generative paradigm are:

Arc pair grammar
 Generalized phrase structure grammar (GPSG; now largely out of date)








Generative semantics (superseded by semantic syntax)
Head-driven phrase structure grammar (HPSG)
Lexical functional grammar (LFG)
Nanosyntax
Relational grammar (RG) (now largely out of date)
Harmonic grammar (HG) (similar to the optimality theory of syntax)

Cognitive and usage-based grammars
The Cognitive Linguistics framework stems from generative grammar, but adheres
to evolutionary rather

than Chomskyan linguistics.

Cognitive

models

often

7


recognise the generative assumption that the object belongs to the verb phrase.
Cognitive frameworks include:
•

Cognitive grammar

•
•

Construction grammar (CxG)
Emergent grammar

2.2.2 Theory of semantics
Theory of semantics or a semantic theory — is a theory which assigns
semantic contents to expressions of a language.
The task of explaining the main approaches to semantic theory in
contemporary philosophy of language might seem to face an in-principle stumbling
block. Given that no two languages have the same semantics—no two languages are
comprised of just the same words, with just the same meanings—it may seem hard
to see how we can say anything about different views about semantics in general, as
opposed to views about the semantics of this or that language. This problem has a
relatively straightforward solution. While it is of course correct that the semantics
for English is one thing and the semantics for French something else, most assume
that the various natural languages should all have semantic theories of (in a sense to
be explained) the same form. The aim of what follows will, accordingly, be to
introduce the reader to the main approaches to natural language semantics—the
main views about the right form for a semantics for a natural language to take—
rather than to provide a detailed examination of the various views about the
semantics of some particular expression. (For an overview, see the entry on word
meaning. For discussion of issues involving particular expression types, see the
entries on names, quantifiers and quantification, descriptions, propositional attitude
reports, and natural kinds.)
One caveat before we get started: before a semantic theorist sets off to explain the
meanings of the expressions of some language, she needs a clear idea of what she is

supposed to explain the meaning of. This might not seem to present much of a
problem; aren‘t the bearers of meaning just the sentences of the relevant language,
and their parts? This is correct as far as it goes. But the task of explaining what the
semantically significant parts of a sentence are, and how those parts combine to
form the sentence, is as complex as semantics itself, and has important
consequences for semantic theory. Indeed, most disputes about the right semantic
treatment of some class of expressions are intertwined with questions about the

8


syntactic form of sentences in which those expressions figure. Unfortunately,
discussion of theories of this sort, which attempt to explain the syntax, or logical
form, of natural language sentences, is well beyond the scope of this entry. As a
result, figures like Richard Montague, whose work on syntax and its connection to
semantics has been central to the development of semantic theory over the past few
decades, are passed over in what follows. (Montague‘s essays are collected in
Montague 1974.) For an excellent introduction to the connections between syntax
and semantics, see Heim & Kratzer (1998); for an overview of the relations between
philosophy of language and several branches of linguistics, see Moss (2012).
Formal semantics
Formal semantics seeks to identify domain-specific mental operations which
speakers perform when they compute a sentence's meaning on the basis of its
syntactic structure. Theories of formal semantics are typically floated on top of
theories of syntax such as generative syntax or Combinatory categorial
grammar and provide a model theory based on mathematical tools such as typed
lambda calculi. The field's central ideas are rooted in early twentieth
century philosophical logic as well as later ideas about linguistic syntax. It emerged
as its own subfield in the 1970s after the pioneering work of Richard
Montague and Barbara Partee and continues to be an active area of research.

Conceptual semantics
This theory is an effort to explain properties of argument structure. The assumption
behind this theory is that syntactic properties of phrases reflect the meanings of the
words that head them. With this theory, linguists can better deal with the fact that
subtle differences in word meaning correlate with other differences in the syntactic
structure that the word appears in. The way this is gone about is by looking at the
internal structure of words. These small parts that make up the internal structure of
words are termed semantic primitives.
Cognitive semantics
Cognitive semantics approaches meaning from the perspective of cognitive
linguistics. In this framework, language is explained via general human cognitive
abilities rather than a domain-specific language module. The techniques native to
cognitive semantics are typically used in lexical studies such as those put forth
by Leonard Talmy, George Lakoff, Dirk Geeraerts, and Bruce Wayne Hawkins.
Some cognitive semantic frameworks, such as that developed by Talmy, take into

9


account syntactic structures as well. Semantics, through modern researchers can be
linked to the Wernicke's area of the brain and can be measured using the eventrelated potential (ERP). ERP is the rapid electrical response recorded with small
disc electrodes which are placed on a person's scalp.
Lexical semantics
A linguistic theory that investigates word meaning. This theory understands that the
meaning of a word is fully reflected by its context. Here, the meaning of a word is
constituted by its contextual relations. Therefore, a distinction between degrees of
participation as well as modes of participation are made.[6] In order to accomplish
this distinction any part of a sentence that bears a meaning and combines with the
meanings of other constituents is labeled as a semantic constituent. Semantic
constituents that cannot be broken down into more elementary constituents are

labeled minimal semantic constituents.
Cross-cultural semantics
Various fields or disciplines have long been contributing to cross-cultural
semantics. Are words like love, truth, and hate universals?[7] Is even the
word sense – so central to semantics – a universal, or a concept entrenched in a
long-standing but culture-specific tradition?[8] These are the kind of crucial
questions that are discussed in cross-cultural semantics. Translation theory,
ethnolinguistics, linguistic anthropology and cultural linguistics specialize in the
field of comparing, contrasting, and translating words, terms and meanings from
one language to another (see Herder, W. von Humboldt, Boas, Sapir, and Whorf).
But philosophy, sociology, and anthropology have long established traditions in
contrasting the different nuances of the terms and concepts we use. And online
encyclopaedias
such
as
the
Stanford
encyclopedia
of
philosophy, , and more and more Wikipedia itself have
greatly facilitated the possibilities of comparing the background and usages of key
cultural terms. In recent years the question of whether key terms are translatable or
untranslatable has increasingly come to the fore of global discussions, especially
since the publication of Barbara Cassin's Dictionary of Untranslatables: A
Philosophical Lexicon, in 2014.
Computational semantics
Computational semantics is focused on the processing of linguistic meaning. In
order to do this concrete algorithms and architectures are described. Within this

10

framework the algorithms and architectures are also analyzed in terms of
decidability, time/space complexity, data structures that they require and
communication protocols.
2.2.3 Overview of English verbs
2.2.3.1 Verbs Definition
A verb is a word that expresses an action ( to run), occurrence ( to happen), or state
of being ( to appear). It is one of the nine parts of speech in English grammar. Nonaction verbs are also referred to as linking or stative verbs, such as to be, to seem, to
sound. Verbs comprise the third largest group of words in English (about 10%) and
appear in any sentence as a major mandatory element tying the subject and
predicate together. Verbs indicate time (past, present, future) and are used in
English in relatively many verb tenses. The verb can be thought of as the center,
heart, or anchor of an English sentence.
Verbs of

Examples

action

Maria dances at the studio and performs every Sunday.

occurrence

occurrence Maria became a professional dancer.

state of being

Maria's studio has stood there ever since she was a child.

Tests for verbs: A good way to identify a verb when a word is in doubt is to
ask, Can I do it? I can succeed (do it) is correct but I can success is incorrect. This
means succeed is a verb and the related part of speech success is not a verb; in this
case, success is a noun.
Another test for verbs is to use the word in question in a different verb tense. If the
sentence still makes sense, the word is a verb.
Original: That‘s the updated version of the software.
Test: That‘s the will update version of the software.
[the word updated here is not a verb because using it in the future simple tense in
the second sentence does not result in a logical sentence; It is an adjective
describing the noun version]
Verbs can also be recognized by some common verb suffixes and prefixes.
Suffix or prefix

Meaning

Examples

11


-ate

to cause, make

to activate, to
differentiate

-fy or -ify

to transform into

to signify, to clarify

- ize (British -ise) to make like

to realize, to criticize

-en

to make/turn into

to redden, to soften

be-

forms transitive verbs that mean

to befriend, to beseech

"cause"
en-

to bring into the condition of

to encode, to engender

Verbs in English indicate the following grammatical categories:
Categories

Type

Examples

1st person
2nd person

I go
You go

3rd person

She goes

Number

singular
plural

He has written
They have written

Tense

present
past
future

I eat
I ate

I will eat

Aspect

simple,
progressive,
perfect,
perfect-progressive

I study every day.
I am studying today.
I have studied for years.
I have been studying for
hours.

Mood

indicative
imperative
subjunctive

I am always on time.
Be there on time !
If I were on time, I
would…

Voice

active
passive

Germans consume a lot
of beer.
A lot of beer is
consumed in Germany.

person

As there are relatively many English verb tenses, verbs in English come in many
forms that provide different shades of meaning. However, English verbs comprise a
12


much easier verb system than that of other languages that have distinct inflectional
verb endings for different persons and number, or even change the verb stem with
various tenses and aspects. In English only one verb ending remained, for verbs in
the third person singular in the Present Simple tense.
Dan cooks dinner for us 3 times a week.
[3rd person, singular, present, simple, indicative, active,
meaning: habit in the present]
Yesterday we were cooking for hours on end.
[1st person, plural, past, progressive, indicative, active,
meaning: action in the past that continued over an extended period of time]
She would have cooked if you had asked her to.
(but in reality you didn‘t ask so she didn‘t cook)
[ would have cooked: 3rd person, singular, past, conditional, active,
meaning: hypothetic outcome in the past, contrary to fact]
[ had asked: 2nd person, singular, past, perfect, subjunctive, active,
meaning: hypothetic assumption in the past, contrary to fact]
I suggest that dinner be cooked no later than 20:00.

[3rd person, singular, present, subjunctive, passive,
meaning: strong recommendation which will not necessarily be fulfilled]
English verbs have 5 principal parts with which other forms are derived
using verb auxiliaries: base/stem, simple past/preterit, past participle, present
participle and the infinitive (the ―name‖ of the verb). Some also include the third
person singular in the present tense as a principle part, as it is the only verb form
that kept its inflectional ending in Modern English.
Gramatical term

Symbol

Regular verb

Irregular
verb

Infinitive

to + V1

to watch

to see

Base Form /
Stem

V1

Watch

See

Present Simple third person singular

V1+s

watches

Sees

Past Simple /Preterit

V2

watched

Saw

Past Participle

V3

watched

Seen

13

Similarity, in Vietnamese, Diep Quang Ban stated that verbs are lexical
words, which have process meaning (including active meaning, dynamic state) and
stative state, understood as direct characteristics of things and nature. That can
combine with preceding words hãy, đừng, chớ and with following words rồi, xong
and normally play role as direct predicates in sentences.
2.2.3.2 Classification
Verbs are classified according to:
+ Their function:
- lexical
- auxiliary

+ Their forms (verb phrase structure):
- finite
- non-finite
+ Their meaning:
- Dynamic
- Stative

+ Verb complementation:
- intensive
- extensive
- Transitive
Monotransitive (VO)
Ditransitive (VOO)
Complextransitive (VOC/A)
Intransitive
According to Greenbaum and Quirk, there are three main verb classes which
are intransitive, transitive and copular verbs. Meanwhile, in Vietnamese, Diep
Quang Ban and Le Bien tend to sort Vietnamese verbs into two main categories:
Independent and Dependent.

In short, CVs in English are one of the three main types of verbs, apart from
intransitive and transitive verbs. There is such kind of CVs in Vietnamese
grammar, though in Vietnamese, CVs are among dependent verbs.
-

2.2.4 Copular Verbs
2.2.4.1 Definition

14


A copular verb is a special kind of verb used to join an adjective or noun
complement to a subject. Common examples are: be (is, am, are, was, were),
appear, seem, look, sound, smell, taste, feel, become and get.
A copular verb expresses either that the subject and its complement denote the same
thing or that the subject has the property denoted by its complement.
For example in the sentence ‗Peter is my boyfriend‘ the copular verb is asserts that
Peter and my boyfriend are the same person whereas in the sentence ‗Peter is
British‘ the copular verb is assigns the quality of Britishness to Peter.
More examples are given below:
- Honey is sweet. (Here the copular verb is assigns the quality of sweetness to
honey.)
- The stew smells good.
- The milk turned sour.
- The night grew dark.
- She became a writer.
After copular verbs we use adjectives, not adverbs.
Compare:
- She spoke intelligently. (Here the adverb intelligently modifies the ordinary verb
spoke.)

- She appears intelligent. (NOT She appears intelligently. Appears is a copular
verb. It should be followed by an adjective, not an adverb.)
The copular verbs like become, get, grow, go, turn, stay, remain, keep etc., are used
to talk about change or the absence of change.
- I am becoming older.
- I am getting older.
- I am growing older.
- The leaves are going yellow.
- The leaves are turning yellow.
According to Quirk and Greenbaum and Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech and
Svarivik, the term “copular” or “copular verb” or “linking verb” or “intensive
verbs” is used to refer to “a verb when it is followed by a subject complement or a
predication adjunct and when this element cannot be dropped without changing the
meaning of the verb”.

15


Copular verb is also defined by Biber, Conrad, and Leech, that is, “a verb
that is used to associate an attribute with the subject of the clause. The attribute is
usually expressed by the subject predicative following the verb”.
The definition of the copular verb according to Leech (2006, 29) is as
follows: ―A main verb which, like the verb be, links or „couples‟ a subject to a
subject complement.‖ (2006, 29) Be is the most common copula and its meaning is
neutral; the other copular verbs are ―equivalent in function to the principal copula,
the verb be‖ (Quirk et al. 1985, 1171) and have an extra meaning in addition.
The copular verbs are also called copulative or linking verbs according to Leech
(2006, 29).
Prototypical copular usage
Horton (1995, 319) points out that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish

between the copular and non-copular construction, because the borders between
them are not sharp; it is more likely a question of degree. It would be a good idea
to describe a prototypical copular verb and its most typical usage.
All the linguistic literature cited in this work mentions the verb be as the
principal copula in English, although be has a few non-copular usages as a main
verb, meaning to exist, as in phrase ―God is.‖ It can also be used as an auxiliary
verb and in ―equative‖ constructions (Joe is my teacher), which differs from
copular usage in two ways: first, both noun phrases (NP) are referential in
―equative‖ constructions, while in case of copular verb the subject is nonreferential, and secondly the two NPs can be reversed (My teacher is Joe) with
almost no difference in meaning. On the other hand, the copular clauses cannot be
reversed at all, as illustrated by the example (Horton 1995, 320-321):
(1)
Joe is a teacher.
(2)
*A teacher is Joe.
Now the syntactic and semantic characteristics of copulas will be examined.
According to Horton (1995, 320), ―a copula is a verb followed by a special
grammatical category, one usually called a predicate (which is said to function as a
subject complement). Predicates are most characteristically made up of a predicate
adjective (Joe is tall) or a predicate noun (Joe is a liar).‖ However, as Horton
argues, other elements are possible, such as a predicate prepositional phrase (Joe‟s
in trouble). Also the complementation by an infinitival phrase is possible (Joe
seems to be in trouble).

16


As for semantic properties, the copular verb is said to be ―semantically
empty‖ (Horton 1995, 320) without its own specific meaning. According to Quirk
et al. (1985, 1174) the verb be is the most neutral in meaning. I propose two

examples to illustrate this claim:
(3)
John is alive.
(4)
John is dead.
In both examples, the verb is the same, yet the meaning of both phrases is
the exact opposite. However, some of the copulas have meanings of their own and
so they can be followed only by a limited number of complements. For example
the verb blush is followed normally by the phrases denoting a red or similar colour;
the verb burst by adjectives open and close.
Copular verb complementation
The principal characteristic of all the copular verbs is that they require a
complement. The complement ―cannot be dropped without changing the meaning
of the verb.‖ (Quirk et al, 1985, 1771) These complements can be of a different
nature. They can be formed by an adjective phrase, by a noun phrase or by an
adjunct.
The adjective phrase (AP) is the most common type of the copular
complementation. The majority of the copular verbs can take an AP as their
complement. An AP can consist simply of one single adjective (be proud).
However, the adjective in an AP can be pre-modified by an adverb or postmodified by other elements (be very proud of himself). The complete AP has in its
premodifying field an adverb (grading or intensifying), or a measure phrase. In its
postmodifying field it can have a prepositional phrase, a that-clause or a verb in the
infinitive. (Veselovská et al. 2005, 97)
The other type of the copular complement is a noun phrase. Although this
sort of complementation is not as frequent as the preceding one, it occurs with the
most frequent copular verbs be (for the current copulas) and become (for the
resulting copulas). As well as the AP, the NP can consist of one single noun, or the
noun can be premodified and postmodified by other elements. The structure of an
NP can be much more complicated than the structure of an AP. The complex
nominal phrase, according to Veselovská et al. (2005, 76) is composed of a

quantifier, a determinant/possessive and another quantifier in its determination
field. In its modification field it can take several adjectives (central and peripheral),

17