In linguistics, a verb phrase or VP is a syntactic unit composed of at least one verb and the dependents of that verb. One can distinguish between two main types of VPs, finite VPs (the verb is a finite verb) and non-finite VPs (the verb is a non-finite verb). While phrase structure grammars acknowledge both, dependency grammars reject the existence of a finite VP constituent. In this regard, the understanding of verb phrases can be theory-driven.
Contents |
In phrase structure grammars such as generative grammar, the VP is a phrase that is headed by a verb. A verb phrase may be constructed from a single verb; often, however, the verb phrase will consist of various combinations of the main verb and any auxiliary verbs, plus optional specifiers, complements, and adjuncts. For example, consider the following sentences:
The first example contains the verb phrase hit the ball to win their first World Series since 2000. The second example contains the main verb saw, the noun phrase (NP) complement the man, and the prepositional phrase (PP) adjunct through the window, which together form the verb phrase. Additionally, the third example contains the main verb gave, and two noun phrases Mary and a book, both selected by the verb in this case. All three together form the verb phrase. Note that according to this definition, the verb phrase corresponds to the predicate of traditional grammar.
Up to the mid/late 1980s, some work in phrase structure grammars thought that some languages lacked a verb phrase. These included languages with extremely free word order (so-called non-configurational languages, such as Japanese, Hungarian, or Australian aboriginal languages), and languages with a default VSO order (several Celtic and Oceanic languages). The current view in some varieties of generative grammar (such as Principles and Parameters) is that all languages have a verb phrase, while others (such as Lexical Functional Grammar) take the view that at least some of these languages do lack a verb phrase constituent.
Finally, phrase structure grammars do not draw the key distinction between finite verb phrases and non-finite verb phrases, since they view both as constituent phrases. Dependency grammars are much different in this regard.
While phrase structure grammars (=constituency grammars) acknowledge both finite and non-finite VP constituents, dependency grammars reject the former. That is, among VPs, dependency grammars acknowledge only non-finite VP constituents:
Since has finished the work contains the finite verb has, it is a finite VP, and since finished the work contains the non-finite verb finished but lacks a finite verb, it is a non-finite VP. Starting with Lucien Tesnière 1959[1], dependency grammars challenge the validity of the initial binary division of the clause into subject (NP) and predicate (VP), which means they reject the existence of the second half, which is a finite VP, as a constituent. They do, however, readily acknowledge the existence of non-finite VPs as constituents. The two competing views of verb phrases are visible in the following trees:
The constituency tree on the left shows the finite VP has finished the work as a constituent, since it corresponds to a complete subtree. The dependency tree on the right, in contrast, does not acknowledge a finite VP constituent, since there is no complete subtree there that corresponds to has finished the work. Note that the analyses agree concerning the non-finite VP finished the work; both see it as a constituent.
Dependency grammars point to the results of many standard constituency tests to back up their stance.[2] For instance, topicalization, pseudoclefting, and answer fragments suggest that non-finite VP does but finite VP does not exist as a constituent:
The * indicates that the sentence is bad. These data must be compared to the results for non-finite VP:
The strings in bold are the ones in focus. Attempts to in some sense isolate the finite VP fail for the finite VP, but the same attempts with the non-finite VP succeed.
Verb phrases are sometimes defined more narrowly in scope to allow for only those sentence elements that are strictly considered verbal elements to form verb phrases. According to such a definition, verb phrases consist only of main verbs, auxiliary verbs, and other infinitive or participle constructions. For example, in the following sentences only the words in bold would be considered to form the verb phrase for each sentence:
This more narrow definition is often applied in functionalist frameworks and traditional European reference grammars. It is incompatible with the phrase structure understanding of the verb phrases, since the strings in bold are not constituents under standard analyses. It is, however, compatible with those grammars, in particular dependency grammars, that view the catena as the fundamental unit of syntactic structure as opposed to the constituent. Furthermore, the verbal elements in (4a-c) are syntactic units consistent with the understanding of predicates in the tradition of predicate calculus.