Adverb following linking verb

[Jennifer Nevsky]

Could you please provide an example of an adverb following a linking verb. I thought primarily adjectives and nouns followed linking verbs.

 

[corum]

Could you please provide an example of an adverb following a linking verb.

The next meeting will be on the fifth of February. When?

I thought primarily adjectives and nouns followed linking verbs.

;-)

 

[Pedroski]

Something is not right there:

'The next meeting will be on the fifth of February.' Here we have an existential statement, an intransitive use of 'be' not a linking verb. If you consider the adverbial 'on the fifth of February' to be a description of 'The next meeting' a lá 'The next meeting will be long.' try to substitute 'seem':

The next meeting will seem long. 'seem' linking verb
*The next meeting will seem on the fifth of February. Not good.
The next meeting will take place on the fifth of February. transitive 'take'

The next meeting, on the fifth of February, will be. Master Yoda speak!
The next meeting, on the fifth of February, will be on the fifth floor. 'be' a locative verb.
The next meeting, on the fifth of February, on the fifth floor, will be the fifth this year. 'be' linking verb

The meeting is the fifth this year.

 

[philo2009]

Could you please provide an example of an adverb following a linking verb. I thought primarily adjectives and nouns followed linking verbs.

He is here.

is=copula (linking verb)
here=adverb

 

[Pedroski]

Isn't here a location? How can 'he' be a location? He can be 'in' a location: He is in London.

He is an engineer, linking verb, apposition

He is happy. linking verb, state adjective.

He is here. locative verb *A here-ish him. cf Happy me!

 

[philo2009]

Isn't here a location? How can 'he' be a location? He can be 'in' a location: He is in London.

He is an engineer, linking verb, apposition

He is happy. linking verb, state adjective.

He is here. locative verb *A here-ish him. cf Happy me!

You seem to be confusing syntatic and semantic classifications here.

Where a copular verb, such as 'be', links a subject to an adverb of place, the resulting construction-type is classified as 'locative'. The verb itself, however, remains copular.

 

[Pedroski]

Why do you suppose 'be' is and only is copular?
In 'He is here.' I equate it directly with Spanish 'estar' = be in a place, OE 'eom' = remain (in) OE wesan = remain. The forms of 'be' are a mixture of the paradigms of three old verbs, two of which meant 'remain' How can you couple/equate a person with a place? A person can only 'be in' a place, a location.

 

[philo2009]

Why do you suppose 'be' is and only is copular?

I have at no time made any such claim.

The verb 'be' can, in fact, function both as a copular full verb (in which capacity it may be complemented by a variety of forms, including noun phrases, adjectives, adverbials and infinitives) and as an auxiliary verb (as in I am reading).

You will not fail to infer from this that an English copula is not automatically restricted - as you appear to think it ought to be - to the assertion of some kind of 'identity' between subject and complement, the functionality of 'be' as a copula in the sentence in question being therefore not a matter of opinion, speculation or supposition, but a simple taxonomic fact accepted by any competent grammarian of the English language.

As for your interesting observations about Spanish grammar (which, unlike English, possesses two distinct verbs corresponding to English 'be'), I suggest you reserve them for questions relating to that particular language!

 

[lauralie2]

Could you please provide an example of an adverb following a linking verb. I thought primarily adjectives and nouns followed linking verbs.

Adverbs of frequency:

Ex: She is still a teacher after all these years.
Ex: They are always happy.
Ex: It is never too late.

 

[philo2009]

Adverbs ... late.

You have highlighted a major ambiguity in the original question, which, by using the vague term 'follow', failed the specify in what role (i.e. as complement, or simply as modifier).

I think it is fairly clear, though, from the subsequent statement that reference was, in fact, to adverbial complementation of a copula.

(If not, Pedroski and I have been completely wasting our time!:-D)

 

[kenkk2]

In short, to be simpler: Linking verbs could be followed(almost)by anything except adverbs containing "Ly-end" ( slowly, interestingly, sadly, unfortunately, happily...), learners of English as a foreign language would find it more easily. Anyway, all of you guys' analyses above are very fascinatingly helpful !Thanks.

 

[lauralie2]

I think it is fairly clear, though, from the subsequent statement that reference was, in fact, to adverbial complementation of a copula.

'Copular', yes; but the following sentences are examples of non-copular uses:

• The meeting will be (held) on the fifth of February.
• He is (located) here.

The adverbials above are not modifying auxiliary verbs.

• Held when? On the fifth.
• Located where? Here.

 

[Pedroski]

I don't know, but I guess lots of languages have a distiction between 'be' and 'be in'. Old English did. I know Spanish and Chinese draw this distinction clearly.

"You will not fail to infer from this that an English copula is not automatically restricted ....."

I'm afraid I will have to fail to infer that. It is not a fact, taxonomic or otherwise, rather a misreading of the facts.

Philo, you seem to be saying, 'be' as a full verb is always copular. Leave aside its use as an auxiliary for now. Do you see no difference in its use in:

1) He is a teacher. Apposition. Coupling. The same apposition: He, a teacher is bound by certain rules.
2) He is in London. You would never equate He = London to say that: *He is London. 'is' looks the same in both, but there is a difference. 1) couples, equates, 2) designates location.

If a copula verb does not assert an identity between arguments, why call it copular? Just call it a verb. All verbs link their arguments, that is no big deal. 'I run fast'

English can not do without its form of 'be in', because such a verb is needed in language. If it happens to look the same as your copular 'be', don't just accept that it is, in fact, the same word.

 

[kenkk2]

Both Lauralie2 and Pedroski are excellent in English Grammar to me, though I feel dizzy after reading all the discussion. You 2 are great !

 

[TheParser]

Could you please provide an example of an adverb following a linking verb. I thought primarily adjectives and nouns followed linking verbs.

NOT A TEACHER

(1) I am among the more than 100 people who have been following this

fascinating thread.

(2) I wish to offer this view from Professor Paul Roberts (Cornell

University) in his book Understanding Grammar (written way back in the

olden days of 1954!!!). I shall summarize his views instead of quoting

them because I realize that copyright laws must be considered:

(1) Linking verbs are usually followed by nouns and adjectives.

(2) In He is here, Professor Roberts says: "...is is best considered not

a linking verb but a predicating verb, like exist in 'He exists.' "

(3) Here, he says, "may be construed conventionally as an adverb

modifying a verb."

(3) Two posters in this thread have exchanged very vigorous

views in a very respectful and friendly manner. This is really a

win-win situation for everyone, for -- as Professors Pence and Emery

remind us in their A Grammar of Present-Day English (1947) -- there are

often several equally good ways to interpret "grammar."

 

[corum]

How can 'he' be a location?

Why would it have to be? A copula is not equivalent to an equal sign, no! In
He is here.,
location is attributed to the referent of the subject and the verb is copular.

Copular complementation

16.21 A verb is said to have COPULAR complementation when it is followed by a subject complement or a predication adjunct (adverb(ial)), and when this element cannot be dropped without changing the meaning of the
verb.

Quirk et al., 1985, p1171.

 

[e2e4]

Here, I am.

 

[lauralie2]

Quirk et al., 1985, p1171.

Explained in more detail here.

 

[Pedroski]

“location is attributed to the referent of the subject and the verb is copular.”

Any particular reason for saying 'the verb is copular'? Does it couple any more than: 'I read a book in bed.'? Does 'in bed' modify 'book', 'I' or 'read'? Do you know why a verb is called copular?

Here is a non-copular use of 'be' in its durative, existential aspect:

I am.

I presume, without wishing to go off at a totally philosophical tangent, that anything that 'is', 'is' somewhere, in a location. From there comes the sense of 'be in' OE wesan, Spanish 'estar' Chinese '在 zai'.

Now qualify it for location:

I am in London. 'in London' is an adverbial of place cf 'I live in London.'

Either the adverbial is a modifier of the verb or the pronoun. There is evidence for the latter. Cf African American: Where you at? We at the store. But in English, we don't usually have adverbial modifiers of personal pronouns. So I would choose the adverbial as a verb modifier.

 

[corum]

Explained in more detail here.

I know. (Kondorosi = svartnik = corum);-)