Eric Arthur Blair, better known by his pen name George Orwell, was an English novelist, essayist and critic, whose work is marked by lucid prose, awareness of social injustice, opposition to totalitarianism, outspoken support of democratic socialism. Orwell wrote literary criticism, poetry and polemical journalism, he is best known for the allegorical novella Animal Farm and the dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. His non-fiction works, including The Road to Wigan Pier, documenting his experience of working class life in the north of England, Homage to Catalonia, an account of his experiences on the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War, are acclaimed, as are his essays on politics, literature and culture. In 2008, The Times ranked him second on a list of "The 50 greatest British writers since 1945". Orwell's work continues to influence popular and political culture and the term "Orwellian"—descriptive of totalitarian or authoritarian social practices—has entered the language together with many of his neologisms, including "Big Brother", "Thought Police", "Hate week", "Room 101", "memory hole", "newspeak", "doublethink", "proles", "unperson" and "thoughtcrime".
Eric Arthur Blair was born on 25 June 1903 in Motihari, British India. His great-grandfather, Charles Blair, was a wealthy country gentleman in Dorset who married Lady Mary Fane, daughter of the Earl of Westmorland, had income as an absentee landlord of plantations in Jamaica, his grandfather, Thomas Richard Arthur Blair, was a clergyman. Although the gentility passed down the generations, the prosperity did not, his father, Richard Walmesley Blair, worked in the Opium Department of the Indian Civil Service. His mother, Ida Mabel Blair, grew up in Moulmein, where her French father was involved in speculative ventures. Eric had two sisters: Marjorie, five years older; when Eric was one year old, his mother his sisters to England. His birthplace and ancestral house in Motihari has been declared a protected monument of historical importance. In 1904 Ida Blair settled with her children at Henley-on-Thames in Oxfordshire. Eric was brought up in the company of his mother and sisters, apart from a brief visit in mid-1907, the family did not see their husband or father, Richard Blair, until 1912.
His mother's diary from 1905 describes a lively round of artistic interests. Before the First World War, the family moved to Shiplake, Oxfordshire where Eric became friendly with the Buddicom family their daughter Jacintha; when they first met, he was standing on his head in a field. On being asked why, he said, "You are noticed more if you stand on your head than if you are right way up." Jacintha and Eric read and wrote poetry, dreamed of becoming famous writers. He said. During this period, he enjoyed shooting and birdwatching with Jacintha's brother and sister. Aged five, Eric was sent as a day-boy to a convent school in Henley-on-Thames, which Marjorie attended, it was a Roman Catholic convent run by French Ursuline nuns, exiled from France after religious education was banned in 1903. His mother wanted him to have a public school education, but his family could not afford the fees, he needed to earn a scholarship. Ida Blair's brother Charles Limouzin recommended St Cyprian's School, East Sussex.
Limouzin, a proficient golfer, knew of the school and its headmaster through the Royal Eastbourne Golf Club, where he won several competitions in 1903 and 1904. The headmaster undertook to help Blair to win a scholarship, made a private financial arrangement that allowed Blair's parents to pay only half the normal fees. In September 1911, Eric arrived at St Cyprian's, he boarded at the school for the next five years. During this period, while working for the Ministry of Pensions, his mother lived at 23 Cromwell Crescent, Earls Court, he knew nothing of the reduced fees, although he "soon recognised that he was from a poorer home". Blair hated the school and many years wrote an essay "Such, Such Were the Joys", published posthumously, based on his time there. At St Cyprian's, Blair first met Cyril Connolly. Many years as the editor of Horizon, Connolly published several of Orwell's essays. While at St Cyprian's, Blair wrote two poems that were published in the Henley and South Oxfordshire Standard.
He came second to Connolly in the Harrow History Prize, had his work praised by the school's external examiner, earned scholarships to Wellington and Eton. But inclusion on the Eton scholarship roll did not guarantee a place, none was available for Blair, he chose to stay at St Cyprian's until December 1916. In January, Blair took up the place at Wellington. In May 1917 a place became available as a King's Scholar at Eton. At this time the family lived at Notting Hill Gate. Blair remained at Eton until December 1921, when he left midway between his 19th birthday. Wellington was "beastly", Orwell told his childhood friend Jacintha Buddicom, but he said he was "interested and happy" at Eton, his principal tutor was A. S. F. Gow, Fellow of Trinity College, who gave him advice in his career. Blair was taught French by Aldous Huxley. Steven Runciman, at Eton with Blair, noted that he and his contemporaries appreciated Huxley's linguistic flair. Cyril Connolly followed Blair to Eton, but because they were in separate years
An auxiliary verb is a verb that adds functional or grammatical meaning to the clause in which it appears, such as to express tense, modality, emphasis, etc. Auxiliary verbs accompany a main verb; the main verb provides the main semantic content of the clause. An example is the verb. Here, the main verb is finish, the auxiliary have helps to express the perfect aspect; some sentences contain a chain of two or more auxiliary verbs. Auxiliary verbs are called helping verbs, helper verbs, or auxiliaries. Below are some sentences that contain representative auxiliary verbs from English, Spanish and French, with the auxiliary verb marked in bold: a. Do you want tea? – do is an auxiliary accompanying the main verb want, used here to form a question – see do-support.b. He has given his all. – has is an auxiliary used in expressing the perfect aspect of give.c. He cogido tu lápiz. – he is an auxiliary accompanying the main verb coger, used here to form a compound verb, the perfect present in Spanish. Have grabbed your pencil ='I have taken your pencil.'d.
Das wurde mehrmals gesagt. – wurde'became' is an auxiliary used to build the passive voice in German. That became many times said ='That was said many times.'e. Sie ist nach Hause gegangen. – ist'is' is an auxiliary used with movement verbs to build the perfect tense/aspect in German. She is to home gone ='She went home/She has gone home.'f. J'ai vu le soleil. – ai'have' is an auxiliary used to build the perfect tense/aspect in French. I have seen the sun ='I have seen the sun/I saw the sun.'g. Nous sommes hébergés par un ami. – sommes'are' is an auxiliary used to build the passive voice in French. We are hosted by a friend; these auxiliaries help show tense/aspect, or form passive voice. Auxiliaries like these appear with a full verb that carries the main semantic content of the clause. Auxiliary verbs help express grammatical tense, aspect and voice, they appear together with a main verb. The auxiliary is said to "help" the main verb; the auxiliary verbs of a language form a closed class, i.e. there is a fixed small number of them.
They are among the most occurring verbs in a language. Acknowledged verbs that can serve as auxiliaries in English and many related languages are the equivalents of be to express passive voice, have to express perfect aspect or past time reference. In some treatments, the copula be is classed as an auxiliary though it does not "help" another verb, e.g. The bird is in the tree. – is serves as a copula with a predicative expression not containing any other verb. Definitions of auxiliary verbs are not always consistent across languages, or among authors discussing the same language. Modal verbs may not be classified as auxiliaries, depending on the language. In the case of English, verbs are identified as auxiliaries based on their grammatical behavior, as described below. In some cases, verbs that function to auxiliaries, but are not considered full members of that class, are called semi-auxiliaries. In French, for example, verbs such as devoir, aller, vouloir and laisser, when used together with the infinitive of another verb, can be called semi-auxiliaries.
The following sections consider auxiliary verbs in English. They list auxiliary verbs present the diagnostics that motivate this special class; the modal verbs are included in this class, due to their behavior with respect to these diagnostics. A list of verbs that function as auxiliaries in English is as follows: be, could, dare, do, may, must, ought, should, wouldThe status of dare and ought is debatable and the use of these verbs as auxiliaries can vary across dialects of English. If the negative forms can't, don't, won't, etc. are viewed as separate verbs the number of auxiliaries increases. The verbs do and have can function as full verbs or as light verbs, which can be a source of confusion about their status; the modal verbs form a subclass of auxiliary verbs. Modal verbs are defective insofar as they cannot be inflected, nor do they appear as gerunds, infinitives, or participles; the following table summarizes the auxiliary verbs in standard English and the meaning contribution to the clauses in which they appear.
Many auxiliary verbs are listed more than once in the table based upon discernible differences in use. Deontic modality expresses an ability, necessity, or obligation, associated with an agent subject. Epistemic modality expresses the speaker's assessment of likelihood of reality. Distinguishing between the two types of modality can be difficult, since many sentences contain a modal verb that allows both interpretations; the verbs listed in the previous section can be classified as auxiliaries based upon two diagnostics: they allow subject–auxiliary inversion and they can take not as a postdependent. The following examples illustrate the extent to which subject–auxiliary inversion can occur with an auxiliary verb but not with a full verb: a, he was working today. B. Was he working today? - Auxiliary verb was allows subject–auxiliary inversion.a. He worked today. B. *Worked he today? - Full verb worked does
In linguistics, an argument is an expression that helps complete the meaning of a predicate, the latter referring in this context to a main verb and its auxiliaries. In this regard, the complement is a related concept. Most predicates take two, or three arguments. A predicate and its arguments form a predicate-argument structure; the discussion of predicates and arguments is associated most with verbs and noun phrases, although other syntactic categories can be construed as predicates and as arguments. Arguments must be distinguished from adjuncts. While a predicate needs its arguments to complete its meaning, the adjuncts that appear with a predicate are optional. Most theories of syntax and semantics acknowledge arguments and adjuncts, although the terminology varies, the distinction is believed to exist in all languages. Dependency grammars sometimes call arguments actants, following Tesnière; the area of grammar that explores the nature of predicates, their arguments, adjuncts is called valency theory.
Predicates have a valence. The valence of predicates is investigated in terms of subcategorization; the basic analysis of the syntax and semantics of clauses relies on the distinction between arguments and adjuncts. The clause predicate, a content verb, demands certain arguments; that is, the arguments are necessary in order to complete the meaning of the verb. The adjuncts that appear, in contrast, are not necessary in this sense; the subject phrase and object phrase are the two most occurring arguments of verbal predicates. For instance: Jill likes Jack. Sam fried the meat; the old man helped the young man. Each of these sentences contains two arguments, the first noun being the subject argument, the second the object argument. Jill, for example, is the subject argument of the predicate likes, Jack is its object argument. Verbal predicates that demand just a subject argument are intransitive, verbal predicates that demand an object argument as well are transitive, verbal predicates that demand two object arguments are ditransitive.
When additional information is added to our three example sentences, one is dealing with adjuncts, e.g. Jill likes Jack. Jill likes Jack most of the time. Jill likes Jack. Jill likes Jack; the added phrases are adjuncts. One key difference between arguments and adjuncts is that the appearance of a given argument is obligatory, whereas adjuncts appear optionally. While typical verb arguments are subject or object nouns or noun phrases as in the examples above, they can be prepositional phrases; the PPs in bold in the following sentences are arguments: Sam put the pen on the chair. Larry does not put up with that. Bill is getting on my case. We know that these PPs are arguments because when we attempt to omit them, the result is unacceptable: *Sam put the pen. *Larry does not put up. *Bill is getting. Subject and object arguments are known as core arguments. Prepositional arguments, which are called oblique arguments, however, do not tend to undergo the same processes. Psycholinguistic theories must explain how syntactic representations are built incrementally during sentence comprehension.
One view that has sprung from psycholinguistics is the argument structure hypothesis, which explains the distinct cognitive operations for argument and adjunct attachment: arguments are attached via the lexical mechanism, but adjuncts are attached using general grammatical knowledge, represented as phrase structure rules or the equivalent. Argument status determines the cognitive mechanism in which a phrase will be attached to the developing syntactic representations of a sentence. Psycholinguistic evidence supports a formal distinction between arguments and adjuncts, for any questions about the argument status of a phrase are, in effect, questions about learned mental representations of the lexical heads. An important distinction acknowledges both semantic arguments. Content verbs determine the number and type of syntactic arguments that can or must appear in their environment; these syntactic functions will vary. In languages that have morphological case, the arguments of a predicate must appear with the correct case markings imposed on them by their predicate.
The semantic arguments of the predicate, in contrast, remain consistent, e.g. Jack is liked by Jill. Jill's liking Jack Jack's being liked by Jill the liking of Jack by Jill Jill's like for JackThe predicate'like' appears in various forms in these examples, which means that the syntactic functions of the arguments associated with Jack and Jill vary; the object of the active sentence, for instance, becomes the subject of the passive sentence. Despite this variation in syntactic functions, the arguments remain semantically consistent. In each case, Jill is the experiencer and Jack is the one being experienced
In linguistics, periphrasis is the usage of multiple separate words to carry the meaning of prefixes, suffixes or verbs, among other things, where either would be possible. Technically, it is a device where grammatical meaning is expressed by one or more free morphemes, instead of by inflectional affixes or derivation. Periphrastic forms are an example of analytic language, whereas the absence of periphrasis is a characteristic of synthetic language. While periphrasis concerns all categories of syntax, it is most visible with verb catenae; the verb catenae of English are periphrastic. The distinction between inflected and periphrastic forms is illustrated across distinct languages; however and superlative forms of adjectives in English provide a straightforward illustration of the phenomenon. For many speakers, both the simple and periphrastic forms in the following table are possible: The periphrastic forms are periphrastic by virtue of the appearance of more or most, they therefore contain two words instead of just one.
The words more and most contribute functional meaning only, just like the inflectional affixes -er and -est. The distinction is evident across full verbs and the corresponding light verb constructions: The light verb constructions are periphrastic because the light verbs have little semantic content, they contribute functional meaning. The main semantic content of these light verb constructions lies with the noun phrase; such distinctions occur in many languages. The following table provides some examples across Latin and English: Periphrasis is a characteristic of analytic languages, which tend to avoid inflection. Inflected synthetic languages sometimes make use of periphrasis to fill out an inflectional paradigm, missing certain forms. A comparison of some Latin forms of the verb dūcere'lead' with their English translations illustrates further that English uses periphrasis in many instances where Latin uses inflection. English needs two or three verbs to express the same meaning that Latin expresses with a single verb.
Latin is a synthetic language. Unlike Classical Hebrew, Israeli Hebrew uses a few periphrastic verbal constructions in specific circumstances, such as slang or military language. Consider the following pairs/triplets, in which the first is/are an Israeli Hebrew analytic periphrasis and the last is a Classical Hebrew synthetic form: שם צעקה ‘’sam tseaká’’ “shouted” vis-à-vis צעק ‘’tsaák’’ “shouted” נתן מבט ‘’natán mabát’’ “looked” AND העיף מבט ‘’heíf mabát’’ “looked” vis-à-vis the Hebrew-descent הביט ‘’hibít’’ “looked at”. According to Ghil'ad Zuckermann, the Israeli periphrastic construction is employed here for the desire to express swift action, stems from Yiddish, he compares the Israeli periphrasis to the following Yiddish expressions all meaning “to have a look”: געבן א קוק ‘’gébņ a kuk’’, which means “to give a look” טאן א קוק ‘’ton a kuk’’, which means “to do a look” the colloquial expression כאפן א קוק ‘’khapņ a kuk’’, which means “to catch a look”. Zuckermann emphasizes that the Israeli periphrastic constructions “are not nonce, ad hoc lexical calques of Yiddish.
The Israeli system is productive and the lexical realization differs from that of Yiddish”. He provides the following Israeli examples: הרביץ hirbíts “hit, beat; the Israeli Hebrew periphrasis דפק הופעה ‘’dafák hofaá’’, which means “hit an appearance” means “dressed smartly”. But while Zuckermann attempted to use these examples to claim that Israeli Hebrew grew simillar to Europian languages, it will be noticed that all of these examples are from the slang and therfore linguistically marked; the normal and daily usage of the verb paradigm in Israeli modern Hebrew is of the synthetic form: צָעַק, הִבִּיט The correspondence in meaning across inflected forms and their periphrastic equivalents within the same language or across different languages leads to a basic question. Individual words are always constituents, but their periphrastic equivalents are NOT constituents. Given this mismatch in syntactic form, one can pose the following questions: how should the form-meaning correspondence across periphrastic and non-periphrastic forms be understood?.
An answer to this question that has come to light is expressed in terms of the catena unit, as implied above. The periphrastic word combinations are catenae when they are not constituents, individual words are catenae; the form-meaning correspondence is therefore consistent. A given inflected one-word catena corresponds to a periphrastic multiple-word catena; the role of catenae for the theory of periphrasis is illustrated with the trees. The first example is across English. Future tense/time in French is constructed with an inflected f
In linguistics, an adjunct is an optional, or structurally dispensable, part of a sentence, clause, or phrase that, if removed or discarded, will not otherwise affect the remainder of the sentence. Example: In the sentence John helped Bill in Central Park, the phrase in Central Park is an adjunct. A more detailed definition of the adjunct emphasizes its attribute as a modifying form, word, or phrase that depends on another form, word, or phrase, being an element of clause structure with adverbial function. An adjunct is not an argument, an argument is not an adjunct; the argument–adjunct distinction is central in most theories of syntax and semantics. The terminology used to denote arguments and adjuncts can vary depending on the theory at hand; some dependency grammars, for instance, employ the term circonstant, following Tesnière. The area of grammar that explores the nature of predicates, their arguments, adjuncts is called valency theory. Predicates have valency; the valency of predicates is investigated in terms of subcategorization.
Take the sentence John helped Bill in Central Park on Sunday as an example: John is the subject argument. Helped is the predicate. Bill is the object argument. In Central Park is the first adjunct. on Sunday is the second adjunct. An adverbial adjunct is a sentence element that establishes the circumstances in which the action or state expressed by the verb takes place; the following sentence uses adjuncts of time and place: Yesterday, Lorna saw the dog in the garden. Notice that this example is ambiguous between whether the adjunct in the garden modifies the verb saw or the noun phrase the dog; the definition can be extended to include adjuncts that modify other parts of speech. An adjunct can be a phrase, or an entire clause. Single word She will leave tomorrow. Phrase She will leave in the morning. Clause She will leave. Most discussions of adjuncts focus on adverbial adjuncts, that is, on adjuncts that modify verbs, verb phrases, or entire clauses like the adjuncts in the three examples just given.
Adjuncts can appear in other domains, however. An adnominal adjunct is one that modifies a noun: for a list of possible types of these, see Components of noun phrases. Adjuncts that modify adjectives and adverbs are called adadjectival and adadverbial; the discussion before the game – before the game is an adnominal adjunct. Very happy – is an "adadjectival" adjunct. Too loudly – too is an "adadverbial" adjunct. Adjuncts are always constituents; each of the adjuncts in the examples throughout this article is a constituent. Adjuncts can be categorized in terms of the functional meaning that they contribute to the phrase, clause, or sentence in which they appear; the following list of the semantic functions is by no means exhaustive, but it does include most of the semantic functions of adjuncts identified in the literature on adjuncts: Causal – Causal adjuncts establish the reason for, or purpose of, an action or state. The ladder collapsed. Concessive – Concessive adjuncts establish contrary circumstances.
Lorna went out. Conditional – Conditional adjuncts establish the condition in which an action occurs or state holds. I would go to Paris. Consecutive – Consecutive adjuncts establish an effect or result, it rained so hard. Final – Final adjuncts establish the goal of an action, he works a lot to earn money for school. Instrumental – Instrumental adjuncts establish the instrument used to accomplish an action. Mr. Bibby wrote the letter with a pencil. Locative – Locative adjuncts establish where, to where, or from where a state or action happened or existed, she sat on the table. Measure – Measure adjuncts establish the measure of the action, state, or quality that they modify I am finished; that is true. We want to stay in part. Modal – Modal adjuncts establish the extent to which the speaker views the action or state as probable, they left. In any case, we didn't do it; that is possible. I'm going to the party. Modificative – Modificative adjuncts establish how the action happened or the state existed, he ran with difficulty.
He stood in silence. He helped me with my homework. Temporal – Temporal adjuncts establish when, how long, or how frequent the action or state happened or existed, he arrived yesterday. He stayed for two weeks, she drinks in that bar every day. The distinction between arguments and adjuncts and predicates is central to most theories of syntax and grammar. Predicates take arguments and they permit adjuncts; the arguments of a predicate are necessary to complete the meaning of the predicate. The adjuncts of a predicate, in contrast, provide auxiliary information about the core predicate-argument meaning, which means they are not necessary to complete the meaning of the predicate. Adjuncts and arguments can be identified using various diagnostics; the omission diagnostic, for instance, helps identify many arguments and thus indirectly many adjuncts as well. If a given constituent cannot be omitted from a sentence, clause, or phrase without resulting in an unacceptable expression, that constituent is NOT an adjunct, e.g. a.
Fred knows. B. Fred knows. – may be an adjunct.a. He stayed after class. B, he stayed. – after class may be an adjun
Nynorsk is one of the two written standards of the Norwegian language, the other being Bokmål. Nynorsk was established in 1929 as one of two state sanctioned fusions of Ivar Aasen's standard Norwegian language with the Dano-Norwegian written language, the other such fusion being called Bokmål. Nynorsk is a variation, closer to Landsmål, whereas Bokmål is closer to Riksmål. In local communities, one quarter of Norwegian municipalities have declared Nynorsk as their official language form, these municipalities account for about 12% of the Norwegian population. Nynorsk is being taught as a mandatory subject in both high school and elementary school for all Norwegians who don't have it as their own language form. Of the remaining municipalities that don't have Nynorsk as their official language form, half are neutral and half have adopted Bokmål as their official language form. Four of Norway's eighteen counties, Hordaland, Sogn og Fjordane and Møre og Romsdal, have Nynorsk as their official language form.
These four together comprise the region of Western Norway. Danish had been the written language of Norway until 1814, Danish with Norwegian intonation and pronunciation was on occasion spoken in the cities. With the independence of Norway from Denmark, Danish became a foreign language and thus lost much of its prestige, a conservative, written form of Norwegian, Landsmål, had been developed by 1850. By this time, the Danish language had been reformed into the written language Riksmål, no agreement was reached on which of the two forms to use. In 1885, the parliament declared the two forms equal. Efforts were made to fuse the two written forms into one language. A result was that Landsmål and Riksmål lost their official status in 1929, were replaced by the written forms Nynorsk and Bokmål, which were intended to be temporary intermediary stages before their final fusion into one hypothesised official Norwegian language known at the time as Samnorsk; this project was abandoned and Nynorsk and Bokmål remain the two sanctioned standards of what is today called the Norwegian language.
Both written languages are in reality fusions between the Norwegian and Danish languages as they were spoken and written around 1850, with Nynorsk closer to Norwegian and Bokmål closer to Danish. The official standard of Nynorsk has been altered during the process to create the common language form Samnorsk. A minor purist fraction of the Nynorsk population has stayed firm with the historical Aasen norm where these alterations of Nynorsk were rejected, known as Høgnorsk. Ivar Aasen-sambandet is an umbrella organization of associations and individuals promoting the use of Høgnorsk, whereas Noregs Mållag and Norsk Målungdom advocate the use of Nynorsk in general; the Landsmål language standard was constructed by the Norwegian linguist Ivar Aasen during the mid-19th century, to provide a Norwegian-based alternative to Danish, written, to some extent spoken, in Norway at the time. The word Nynorsk has another meaning. In addition to being the name of the present, official written language standard, Nynorsk can refer to the Norwegian language in use after Old Norwegian, 11th to 14th centuries, Middle Norwegian, 1350 to about 1550.
The written Norwegian, used until the period of Danish rule resembles Nynorsk. A major source of old written material is Diplomatarium Norvegicum in 22 printed volumes. In 1749, Erik Pontoppidan released a comprehensive dictionary of Norwegian words that were incomprehensible to Danish people, Glossarium Norvagicum Eller Forsøg paa en Samling Af saadanne rare Norske Ord Som gemeenlig ikke forstaaes af Danske Folk, Tilligemed en Fortegnelse paa Norske Mænds og Qvinders Navne, it is acknowledged that the first systematic study of the Norwegian language was made by Ivar Aasen in the mid 19th century. After the dissolution of Denmark–Norway and the establishment of the union between Sweden and Norway in 1814, Norwegians considered that neither Danish, by now a foreign language, nor by any means Swedish, were suitable written norms for Norwegian affairs; the linguist Knud Knudsen proposed a gradual Norwegianisation of Danish. Ivar Aasen, favoured a more radical approach, based on the principle that the spoken language of people living in the Norwegian countryside, who made up the vast majority of the population, should be regarded as more Norwegian than that of upper-middle class city-dwellers, who for centuries had been influenced by the Danish language and culture.
This idea was not unique to Aasen, can be seen in the wider context of Norwegian romantic nationalism. In the 1840s Aasen studied its dialects. In 1848 and 1850 he published the first Norwegian grammar and dictionary which described a standard that Aasen called Landsmål. New versions detailing the written standard were published in 1864 and 1873, in the 20th century by Olav Beito in 1970. During the same period, Venceslaus Ulricus Hammershaimb standardised the orthography of the Faroese language. Spoken Faroese is related to Landsmål and dialects in Norway proper, Lucas Debes and Peder Hansen Resen classified the Faroese tongue as Norwegian in the late 17th century. However, Faroese was established as a separate language. Aasen's work is based on the idea that Norwegian dialects had a common structure that made them a separate language alongside Danish and Swedish; the central point for Aasen therefore became to find and show the structural dependencies between the dialects. In order t
The subject in a simple English sentence such as John runs, John is a teacher, or John was ran over by a car is the person or thing about whom the statement is made, in this case'John'. Traditionally the subject is the word or phrase which controls the verb in the clause, to say with which the verb agrees. If there is no verb, as in John - what an idiot!, or if the verb has a different subject, as in John - I can't stand him!, then'John' is not considered to be the grammatical subject, but can be described as the'topic' of the sentence. These definitions seem clear enough for simple sentences such as the above, but as will be shown in the article below, problems in defining the subject arise when an attempt is made to extend the definitions to more complex sentences and to languages other than English. For example, in the sentence It is difficult to learn French, the grammatical subject seems to be the word'it', yet arguably the'real' subject is'to learn French'. Sentences beginning with a locative phrase, such as There is a problem, isn't there?, in which the tag question'isn't there?'
Seems to imply that the subject is the adverb'there' create difficulties for the definition of subject. In languages such as Latin or German the subject of a verb has a form, known as the nominative case: for example, the form'he' is used in sentences such as he ran, he broke the window, he is a teacher, he was hit by a car, but there are some languages such as Basque or Greenlandic, in which the form of a noun or pronoun when the verb is intransitive is different from when the verb is transitive. In these languages, which are known as ergative languages, the concept of'subject' may not apply at all; the subject is, according to a tradition that can be traced back to Aristotle, one of the two main constituents of a clause, the other constituent being the predicate, whereby the predicate says something about the subject. According to a tradition associated with predicate logic and dependency grammars, the subject is the most prominent overt argument of the predicate. By this position all languages with arguments have subjects, though there is no way to define this for all languages.
From a functional perspective, a subject is a phrase. Many languages do not do this, by this definition would not have subjects. All of these positions see the subject in English determining person and number agreement on the finite verb, as exemplified by the difference in verb forms between he eats and they eat; the stereotypical subject precedes the finite verb in declarative sentences in English and represents an agent or a theme. The subject is a multi-word constituent and should be distinguished from parts of speech, which classify words within constituents; the subject is a constituent that can be realized in numerous forms in English and other languages, many of which are listed in the following table: There are several criteria for identifying subjects: 1. Subject-verb agreement: The subject agrees with the finite verb in person and number, e.g. I am vs. *I is.2. Position occupied: The subject immediately precedes the finite verb in declarative clauses in English, e.g. Tom laughs.3. Semantic role: A typical subject in the active voice is an agent or theme, i.e. it performs the action expressed by the verb or when it is a theme, it receives a property assigned to it by the predicate.
Of these three criteria, the first one is the most reliable. The subject in English and many other languages agrees with the finite verb in number; the second and third criterion are strong tendencies that can be flouted in certain constructions, e.g. a. Tom is studying chemistry. - The three criteria agree identifying Tom as the subject.b. Is Tom studying chemistry? - The 1st and the 3rd criteria identify Tom as the subject.c. Chemistry is being studied. - The 1st and the 2nd criteria identify Chemistry as the subject. In the first sentence, all three criteria combine to identify Tom as the subject. In the second sentence, which involves the subject-auxiliary inversion of a yes/no-question, the subject follows the finite verb, which means the second criterion is flouted, and in the third sentence expressed in the passive voice, the 1st and the 2nd criterion combine to identify chemistry as the subject, whereas the third criterion suggests that by Tom should be the subject because Tom is an agent.
4. Morphological case: In languages that have case systems, the subject is marked by a specific case the nominative.5. Omission: Many languages systematically omit a subject, known in discourse; the fourth criterion is better applicable to languages other than English given that English lacks morphological case marking, the exception being the subject and object forms of pronouns, I/me, he/him, she/her, they/them. The fifth criterion is helpful in languages that drop pronominal subjects, such as Spanish, Italian, Greek and Mandarin. Though most of these languages are rich in verb forms for determining the person and number of the subject and Mandarin have no such forms at all; this dropping pattern does not automatically make a language a pro-drop language. In other languages, like English and French, most clauses should have a subject, which should be either a noun, a pronoun, or a