Venn Diagram

[Andrew Patterson]

I need to change the title of my Venn diagram as it now includes far more than catenatives.

Which title do you prefer:
A. Venn diagram of English verb structures.
B. Venn diagram of English Verb patterns.

I will also be adding two further structures/patterns to my diagram soon:

1. Verb+Question word+to+Infinitive
eg.
decide who to employ
decide what to do

2. Verb+Object+Question word+Subject+Verb
eg.
Ask somebody who they mean.
Ask somebody what they mean

I'd like to know if anyone knows what these structures are called, and any verbs that fit into these structures/patterns.

Thanks.
http://www.geocities.com/endipatterson/Catenative.html

[lolwhites]

I'm not convinced by the concept of Verb+Object+Question word+Subject+Verb ; it seems a bit linear to me. Isn't Question word+Subject+Verb best analysed as a noun clause?

Consider:
I asked him a question.
I asked him what he meant.
You need to point out the relationship between these two structures.

[Andrew Patterson]

I'm not convinced by the concept of Verb+Object+Question word+Subject+Verb ; it seems a bit linear to me. Isn't Question word+Subject+Verb best analysed as a noun clause?

Consider:
I asked him a question.
I asked him what he meant.
You need to point out the relationship between these two structures.

Thank you, Lolwhites for replying so fast. I think that's a record.

Thank you too for pointing out that it is a noun clause. I think that I will describe the relationship that you pointed out. I found the patterns/structures on page ii) of The Longman Dictionary of Contempory English. (That's page ii) not page 2.) ie the bit in the front that nobody reads, but probably should.) Longman apparantly felt that these two structures were important enough to point them out whenever a verb that could take the structure appeared in the body of the dictionary.

I'm not sure what you mean by "a bit linear" if you mean massively collocatory, I don't see any harm in that. Six words that make a collocation (seven if you count the subject) means that you've got a ready made sentence. What more could you ask for? (OK, maybe I should get out more.)

Any thoughts on the title?

[Casiopea]

B. Venn diagram of English Verb patterns sounds nice.

Code: Select all

1. Verb+Question word+to+Infinitive
decide who to employ
decide what to do

Hmm. Isn't it, decide on something: verb + nominal object? By the way, 'who' and 'what' are called interrogatives.

Code: Select all

2. Verb+Object+Question word+Subject+Verb
Ask somebody who they mean
Ask somebody what they mean

In this case, the subcategorization frame would be,

ask [somebody], [something]
ask + nominal + nominal

All the best,

[Andrew Patterson]

Thank you Cassiopea,

I tend to prefer "pattern" too, for the following reasons:

1. structure might be construed as refering to the way a single verb was made up, and so at first the reader might think that the diagram was about phrasal verbs. Pattern is less likely to be construed this way.
2. As you said, "pattern" [quite literally] sounds nice. The word pattern has the connotation of something that is pretty, whereas "structure" has the connotation of something that is ugly.

Have you looked at the diagram yet, by the way. It's getting a tad unweildy now, and I think I'm going to have to add a contents, so that everyone can be sure that they've looked at all the at present 25 pages (soon to be 28.)

Hmm. Isn't it, decide on something: verb + nominal object? By the way, 'who' and 'what' are called interrogatives.

I'm a little confused here. I thought an object was either direct or indirect.

Could you enlighten me as to what a "nominal object" is, and what its counterpart might be?

"who" and "what" are indeed called "interogatives". This word is a synonym of "question word". I tend to prefer question word because most people know what a question is, but not every one knows what interrogatory statement is. It is, therefore, the plainer alternative. You can also make the nice abbreviation, "Qwd" from it.

Thanks.

[Casiopea]

I like your reasons for adopting 'pattern' over 'structure.

28 pages I've yet to find my way to the Venn. Sorry.

Nominal objects can be direct (DO) or indirect (IO), for example,

I gave her (IO) the book (DO).

They can also function as object complements (OC),

They call him (DO) John (OC).

What's your take on "Ask him a question?"?

Interrogatives, what you've referred to as Question words, are actually called WH-words in the Bit-ness. It's recognized standard terminology, not to mention shorter in form and a little more catchy than Question words.

All the best,

[Andrew Patterson]

What's your take on "Ask him a question?"?

Well, I don't like the punctuation as the part in inverted commas isn't a question . Apart from that it's a ditransitive verb.

I avoid getting bogged down with direct an indirect objects. Students intuitively know who is being asked and what they are being asked. Just compare, "Give a pen to him," with "Give him a pen," and similar examples and exercises, check their understanding with Question word questions/Wh-questions or whatever YOU like to call them:
What is he giving? Who is giving the pen? Who is he giving it to?

They'll get the message.

Interrogatives, what you've referred to as Question words, are actually called WH-words in the Bit-ness. It's recognized standard terminology, not to mention shorter in form and a little more catchy than Question words.

All three are correct, and we wonder why students seem more confused by grammar than helped by it Don't forget "continuous vs progressive," too. (I'm a continuous man myself.)

Personally, I've never liked the term "Wh-question," since "How" is included, and under some circumstances, so is "If" (It's a substitute for "whether.")

[Andrew Patterson]

I have completely redrawn my diagram, and I think that I have finally come up with a relatively clean uncluttered design which nevertheless still manages to describe 28 possible patterns or overlaps between patterns.

I haven't quite finished putting all the links up, but if you'd like to take a look, it's at the same old URL.

http://www.geocities.com/endipatterson/Catenative.html

[Andrew Patterson]

I'm having a little difficulty placing ADVISE, ALLOW and CAUSE in my diagram. I get the feeling that there are certain usages, which although I would not normally say, may not be wrong. We all have our own ideolect.

Could you tell me if each of these words can be:

A. Followed by the object, "to" and the infinitive.
B. Followed by a gerund.
C. Either followed by the object "to" and the infinitive OR by a gerund.

Also please indicate if the verb or its following verb needs to be negative to fit into the pattern.

Could you also indicate your country of origin as I think that there may be a difference between West and East Altantic English here. Thanks.

[Lorikeet]

I'm having a little difficulty placing ADVISE, ALLOW and CAUSE in my diagram. I get the feeling that there are certain usages, which although I would not normally say, may not be wrong. We all have our own ideolect.

Could you tell me if each of these words can be:

A. Followed by the object, "to" and the infinitive.
B. Followed by a gerund.
C. Either followed by the object "to" and the infinitive OR by a gerund.

Also please indicate if the verb or its following verb needs to be negative to fit into the pattern.

Could you also indicate your country of origin as I think that there may be a difference between West and East Altantic English here. Thanks.

For me,

"I'd advise checking in early for your flight." and
"I'd advise you to check in early for your flight."
are both okay, but the first one is not necessarily only applicable to "you."

"I don't allow smoking in my house." and
"I won't allow you to smoke in my house."
follow the same idea.

"Boredom causes sleeping." seems more general, while
"Boredom causes me to sleep."
refers just to me, and while a little weird, I think both are acceptable. I just ran out of ideas

American English.

[Andrew Patterson]

Thanks Laurie,

"would" and other modals can do funny things to the catenatives. Can "advise be followed by a gerund if it isn't preceded by "would"?

[Lorikeet]

Thanks Laurie,

"would" and other modals can do funny things to the catenatives. Can "advise be followed by a gerund if it isn't preceded by "would"?

Hmm it sounded better with "would" but let me see...

"I usually advise getting the tickets ahead because it might be sold out."

sounds okay, but sometimes if I think too long, everything sounds right .

[Andrew Patterson]

I've updated my diagram of the English verb patterns, and am currently working on the overlaps between verbs followed by:
1. the object and bare infinitive;
2. the past participle without an object;
3. the past participle with an object; and
4. "have got"

This is currently only in the work in progress section:
www.geocities.com/endipatterson/WorkInProgress.html

1. contains the verbs of passive perception and also "have" eg I'll have the waiter bring another bottle of wine. "Have" also forms perfect tenses, so I've placed it in the overlap of 1 and 2.

3. also contains "have" eg I'll have it done in the garage, but also "get", eg I'll get it done in the garage. Therefore I have overlapped 3 in the appropiate place.

I have also placed "have got" in there, but I don't really know how to classify it and it may be in the wrong place.

Again, "have" is the first verb, but I'm a loss as to what "got" is in this context.

"have got" can of course be used to indicate possession, eg I've got a brand new combine-harvester; and also as an alternative to "have to" eg I've got to go now.

At first I thought that US English might hold the key, since the past participle is "gotten", I thought, it could be the past form. I'm not convinced, though. There seems to be an idea of possesion as a result of getting something at some time before now and the possession is present evidence of that getting. Certainly the possession is implied to be in the present. That would imply the present perfect.

Can anyone help here?

As always the main diagram is at:
www.geocities.com/endipatterson/Catenative.html

[Stephen Jones]

Using 'interrogative' or 'question word' when there isn't a question in sight seems a little counterintive.

[Andrew Patterson]

Using 'interrogative' or 'question word' when there isn't a question in sight seems a little counterintive.

Thank you Stephen,

I presume that you are refering to the forms that I have marked:
1. Verb+Question word+to+Infinitive, and
2. Verb+Object+Question word+Subject +Verb

An example of 1. might be, "We chose when to go."
An example of 2. might be, "I enquired if we were going to go."

The words which I have called question words are:

Who, what, when, what time, where, how, how much, whose, whether and if.

I agree that a question is not always implied in these forms, although it often is used to report a question. The problem then is what to call these words, they are variously called question words, interogatives and wh- words. I admit wh-word doesn't imply that it has to involve a question, but then it makes the inclusion of "how", "how much" and "if" a little difficult. Furthermore such words exist in many languages most of which have these words beginning with "Qu-" or "K-".

If you can suggest a better term, please let me know.