Difference between revisions of "Be"
From Creolista!
(→Major Uses) |
(→Major Uses) |
||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
<li>Mark isn't. (negation) (VP ellipsis)</li><br> | <li>Mark isn't. (negation) (VP ellipsis)</li><br> | ||
− | <li>These ideas aren't mine. (sujet parlant est bizarrement attribut du sujet grammatical)</li> | + | <li>These ideas aren't mine. (sujet parlant est bizarrement attribut du sujet grammatical)</li><br> |
<li>Were they <u>to lose the lawsuit</u>, they would probably go bankrupt. (Infintival expressing a condition)<br> | <li>Were they <u>to lose the lawsuit</u>, they would probably go bankrupt. (Infintival expressing a condition)<br> | ||
+ | <li>They were to lose in the end. (infinitival expressing a historical fact known to the storyteller) | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
</ol> | </ol> | ||
− |
Revision as of 21:51, 30 January 2013
Avertissement: cette page est destiné à un analyse grammatical du mot "be" :P
Forms
- dictionary form (bare infinitive): be
- present tense: are (1p, 2s/p, 3p), is (3s), am (1s)
- past tense: was (1s, 3s), were (1p, 2s/p, 3p)
- present participle: being
- past participle: been
- copula: syntax
- It's a worktool. (NP)
- A worktool, is it?
- The door is open. (Adj)
- They're sick.
- The machine is breaking. (You can hear it.) (Present Participle)
- The machine is broken. (Past participle)
- Is Raymond in? (Particle)
- Mark isn't. (negation) (VP ellipsis)
- These ideas aren't mine. (sujet parlant est bizarrement attribut du sujet grammatical)
- Were they to lose the lawsuit, they would probably go bankrupt. (Infintival expressing a condition)
- They were to lose in the end. (infinitival expressing a historical fact known to the storyteller)
Major Uses
En semantique on parlerait plutôt de l'attribution on parlerait de sa fonction, qui est souvent de lié un sujet à un attribut, un ensemble (ou l'invers)...