Talk:Catenative verb

Proposed move
This article should be moved to Catenative verb. 68.160.154.34 (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

To do
Right now, this article is mostly just copied text from the wiktionary entry. I think it's interesting enough to deserve at least a brief bit of original text, but I've never heard of this term before. Indeterminate (talk) 07:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * As the originator of this entry, I would like to say that I first made the entry at wiktionary which is why this is basically a copy. If you like, as this is on "low priority" and unlikely to be upgraded by any specialists, I could make a more extended entry here giving more detailed information. -- Algrif (talk) 18:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

This needs a lot of work but I do not have the specialist editing skills to add to it. Here are some of my somewhat rambling thoughts, however:

Catenatives must be understood in relation to the modal verbs [March 2002][Michael Thomson] which are followed by the bare infinitive. The modal verbs are distinguished from the [?other] catenatives in that the modal verbs are also auxiliaries which the catenatives are not. Frankly, I do not know how well this term is defined does anyone know if the modal verbs are considered to be catenatives? The verbs "help", "let", "make" and "leave" can sometimes be followed by the bare infinitive eg "Help lift this," "Let go", "make do" [Single form only] "leave go" but are not auxiliaries are they then catenatives? In US English, "come" and "go" are often followed by the bare infinitive eg "Come fly with me," and "Go figure" are these catenatives? In UK English, "come" and "go" are often joined to a following infinitive by "and" eg "Come and see," and "Go and get it." "Stop", "try" can also do this in all cases as can a few other verbs in idioms and other expressions eg "Get down and boogie." Are these catenatives? Are verbs before that-clauses catenatives? Are The verbs introducing the present and past subjunctives catenatives?

I also notice that you wrote present participle/gerund. Why is no distinction made? This wouldn't seem to always be the case - "be" followed by the present participle makes continuous tenses, for instance. Verbs followed by an object would appear forced into having a present participle because with another noun, one could not replace the -ing form with it eg "I saw him talking the money", Note that these are mainly verbs of passive perception or verbs with ideas of restriction eg prevent someone from doing something. However, "come" and "go" don't have an object are followed by the present particple eg "come dancing" and "go fishing".

AJP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.94.228 (talk) 13:56, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Still very weak
Although WP sources are not taken as reliable sources for academic purposes, we take keen interest on the provided expertness in WP for certain subjects or concepts in question. We usually review articles provided from mainstream sources and provide further inputs to those authors of the articles. With this regard, we are in the opinion that this article needs a full review. Unless our regular WP contributors come for  their opinions, we are  too in the same situation to provide any input on this. A recent post from LangLing has some more inputs on this that WP may want to add,  but we except more inputs from our WP experts on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HowardReview (talk • contribs) 20:36, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 11:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)