User:Drew.ward/sandbox

Studies of grammar tend to unfortunately focus on form rather than function which is the actual domain of grammar -- the combining of various functional units to convey meaning within a given language. This is in fact the root of most major flaws within the Chomskyan models of Syntax and generative grammar frameworks, as most languages (English especially) use identical structural forms as multiple functions, often expressing varied meanings, even within the same combination of syntactic structure and functional role. In languages such as English, accurate syntactic analysis based solely on inspection of structures of forms, often yields erroneous results, as the syntactic role of a given form cannot be properly and accurately ascertained without awareness of its function.

Mode provides a means of overcoming this issue of form versus function by enabling verbs to exist in various functional forms which enable them to convey a myriad of information when featured in an utterance above and beyond those attributes and qualities of meaning inherent in the semiotemic (lexical) meaning of the verb itself.

Mode
Separate from mood and modality is mode. Mode refers to the various functional manners in which the verb may be deployed. Verbs may function in two primary modes: finite and non-finite.

Finite Modes
Finite modes are those in which the verb is bound to a subject or object and functions to convey the primary assertion of the construction in which it appears. Verbs in finite modes fulfil a verjective function, always occurring as either auxiliary or vector. The finite modes include the indicative, subjunctive, & imperative.

Non-Finite Modes
Non-finite modes are those in which the verb is unbound syntactically and fulfils a nonverjective function within the construction in which it appears. Non-finite modes permit use of verbs in functional roles normally assigned to other parts of speech. They allow verbs to be used nominally, adjectivally, or adverbially while retaining reference to the root verbal nature. Non-finite modes include the infinitive, gerund, participle, and verbial (or, verbal noun).

Mode vs. Mood vs. Modality
The similar nomenclature of these three linguistic categories is unfortunate and has been the source of considerable confusion, primarily resulting in the conflating of the various concepts of mode, mood, and modality into a single category, or even worse, resulting in situations in which more narrow definitions of each result in things which should be included in one category being excluded from its rightful category, or being included in an inapplicable one which further muddles the chances for clear divisions:


 * Mode is the simplest to define as it describes a series of potential functions a verb may fulfil with each of those functions carrying with it specifically defined syntactic and morphological attributes which determine how a verb in each mode may function and what form or forms a verb in that mode may appear.  Modes do not express specific meanings beyond the inherent meaning of the root verb and the generic semantic functional values of the individual mode itself.  While modes do not express specific meaning, they do enable such expression of meaning.  The non-finite modes are less versatile their usage than finite modes with each non-finite mode enabling the verb to function in only a very limited number of syntactic roles, each with specific semantic limitations.  The purpose of this category is more obvious in the finite modes because each finite mode represents not a single set of forms as with non-finite modes, but instead an entire specific conjugation pattern.  It is this use of varied sets of patterns which enable the versatile syntactic and semantic flexibility of English verbal constructions, especially in terms of tense, aspect, perfection, voice, and mood.


 * Modality while being a less often used term than mood, is more easily addressed after mode.  Whilst mode has very little to do with meaning, modality is all about meaning, being a wholly semantic category.  Modality by its simplest definition, provides a manner of classifying and describing any layer of meaning added to the primary meaning of a verb or verbal construction, and may be applied to any verbal functional unit at any syntactic depth layer within an utterance such an auxiliary, vector, verdict, an adverbial modifying any of those elements, or to the entire verject itself.  Modality covers a wide range of semantic values that can best be described as using added meaning as a further qualification onto that information already conveyed by the subordinate.  A nearly innumerable number of modalities exist and with them also quite a few proposed classification schemes.  Overall though, modalities are most often divided into those which are factual versus those which are not; those which deal with what should be versus what may be; those which reflect the attitude of the speaker toward the verb, and those which reflect the attitude of the subject toward the verb.


 * Mood simply put, describes the means of expressing modality via the features of a language.  Mood is further divided into two overall realms of expression: lexical mood which refers to the inherent modal qualities of individual verbs that occur as an attribute of the core meaning of that particular verb itself; and  grammatical mood which refers to the use of any syntactic or pragmatic function within a language to convey modality and includes such easily observable features as using modal auxiliaries, the use of modal adverbs, or the use of emphasis; but also less readily obvious features as vocal stress and tone, body language, rhythm and tempo, and any number of other linguistic and extralinguistic means of conveying such ideas from one person to another.  Any feature of a language that conveys modality as its primary meaning and function is called a modal; while some modalities may be expressed only via specific modals, most modals can themselves express multiple modalities with the specific modality expressed often syntactically ambiguous and primarily determined by contextually.

For all intents and purposes, mood as expression and modality as meaning are inseparable within the context of discussions on grammar and the linguistics of any given language; also, as mood is originally a corruption of mode which is separate from modality, with that erroneous term mood having been further reanalysed as referring to attitude (a meaning drawn upon the similar word of English origin rather than the correct Latin modus from which 'mode' is formed) and thus leading to its conflation with modality: within these texts herein, modality shall be applied to both meaning (as in the various modalities) as well as expression of such meaning, while the term mood shall not be used at all.

Roots of Confusion & Historical Context
Etymologies:


 * mode (n.)


 * "manner," late 14c., from L. modus "measure, extent, quantity; a way, manner, fashion, style" (in Late Latin also "mood" in grammar and logic), from PIE root *med- "to measure, limit, consider, advise, take appropriate measures".


 * modal (adj.)


 * 1560s, term in logic, from M.Fr. modal and directly from M.L. modalis "of or pertaining to a mode," from L. modus "measure, manner, mode".


 * mood (n.)


 * "grammatical form indicating the function of a verb," 1560s, an alteration of mode.


 * modality (n.)


 * 1610s, from O.Fr. modalité or directly from M.L. modalitatem (nom. modalitas) "a being modal," from modalis.

As can be gleaned from the etymologies above, mode is the original term used by grammarians of English to describe the various functional forms of the verb. While considerably comparison between Latin and English were made, it was generally disputed whether English actually possessed moods, as these, it was argued required substantially greater variance in inflection than the English verb allows, an argument that persists to this day. By the late Eighteenth Century, there exists a fairly unified usage in which the functional forms of the English verb were described as modes with this generally listed as fourfold: indicative, subjunctive, imperative, and infinitive. Some grammars also listed participle as another, while still others argued for potential and optative as well, but with these latter two acknowledged not as modes, but as moods. During the 1700's there also emerge discussions and classification schemes within grammars of not only modes, nor mention of mood within the contrast with Latin, but also of modality, with arguments ranging from an additional few modalities to there being as many modalities as there were verbs (according to one grammar over 4300 at the time); such discussions also begin to point out that clear lines between various modalities and individual moods (grammatical forms expressing modality) and modes may not always be drawn.

Around the turn of the 19th Century, popular grammarians including Murray were arguing against the use of the term 'mode' in describing functional variation of verbs not because it failed to accurately describe the functional forms, but instead because mode was being similarly deployed in describing equivalent variation within other parts of speech as well (modes of nouns, modes of adjectives, etc.) with it being thought that application of such a generically employed term would risk ambiguity. Desiring a replacement term and also seeking to move the discussion of such functional forms toward the realm of the growing field of modality, Murray and others argued that mode be replaced by mood. It is likely that the selection of mood had little to do with a desire for altering the form of mode or to apply a previously limited concept similar to modern mood from Latin into English (as that was already handled by mode), but moreso as either an accidental or intentional reanalysis of the role of such forms not to enable expression of meaning, but as embodiments of meaning themselves as reflected in the English root of the word mood which meant attitude. So while the words mode, mood, modality, and modal may all seem on the surface similar, it is modern 'mood' that in fact does not fit as it carries a different meaning purposely drawn from a different root, versus mode, modal, and modality which all go back to he Latin modus, 'manner or style of verb', not meaning of or attitude toward the verb as is so erroneously contrived today.

By the mid 19th Century, mode and mood are used interchangeably in English grammars, usually with their equivalence explicitly spelled out upon first mention. Mood in grammar, is listed by Webster as a corruption of the correct mode as late as 1913. By the late 1800's, authors of various grammars are utilizing different terminology schemes with mood seemingly displacing mode during this time. The unfortunate coincidence is that during this same period, awareness of the expression of modalities in English as mood is gaining ground and with the growing acceptance of such views comes the first widespread conflation of the three concepts as the not yet diverged concepts of mood & modality are forced into collision with mode purely as a result of nomenclature choice. With many authors shifting all usage over to a single term and that being mood, it is from this point on that functional forms as modes, and grammatical expressions of modality as moods, further blended with general notions of modality also being termed mood, contrive a single name for three categories, now, all labelled mood and with the inevitable effect that conflated nomenclature results in conflated categories so that understanding of there being these three separate categories quickly gives way to the troublesome modern view of the catch-all linguistic category of mood.

=The Non-Finite Modes=

Non-Finite (from non- "not" + Latin adj. finitus meaning "bound", past participle of fīnīre "to bind") is the grammar and linguistic term for those modes of the verb which are not bound to the verbal syntax of a verdict and do not perform a verbal function within the verject of an utterance. Non-finite modes thus include only those forms whose use is limited to serving as nouns, adjectives, or adverbs; verbs in non-finite modes may not function as a vector or auxiliary, nor may they appear within the verbal construction of a verdict. Verbs in non-finite modes fulfil the nominal roles of subject or object, act adjectivally to describe a nominal, or act adverbially modifying a verb; in performing this last function, verbs in modes may appear as part of verdict or verject when modifying that verject, any inclusive verdict, or further any of a verdict's inclusive auxiliaries or its vector just as any adverbial (adverb, adverbial phrase, or clause or prepositional phrase acting adverbially) would but a no time are such non-finite verbs actually part of the verbal function or verbal construction it modifies.

The non-finite modes provide a means of extending the root meaning of the verb to non-verbal syntactic functions normally fulfilled by other parts of speech (nouns (including pronouns), adjectives, or adverbs). Verbs in non-finite modes act as one or more of these other parts of speech, but do so while retaining reference to and varying qualities and flexibilities of their core verbal character. In Modern English, the non-finite modes are not marked for tense or agreement for person or number, verbs in some non-finite modes may however be marked for internal expression of aspect, perfection, evidentiality, modality, and voice (such expression is limited to the internal syntax of the non-finite verb, and has no impact on similar verbal information expressed beyond the non-finite verb or verbal construction, via any finite verb.  The non-finite modes represent unique combinations of form and function, and feature verbs in one or more forms which perform a limited number of functions in specific ways as limited by each mode;  the non-finite modes include the infinitive ( verb, to + verb, verb+ing  'walk', 'to walk', 'walking'), gerund ( to + verb, verb+ing  'to walk', 'walking'), participle ( to + verb, verb+ing, verb+ed / verb+en  'to walk', 'walking', 'walked' / 'eaten'), and verbial -- a verbal noun with various forms. It should be noted that non-finite modes refer to functions rather than forms, and that not all occurrences of forms indicative of such functions are in fact, non-finite verbs.

Infinitive
noun - names the verb

The Infinitive as 'to go' is the form of the verb that contains neither affirmation nor command, but merely names the action in the manner of a noun: 'to reign is worth ambition' for 'the act of reigning'.

The name 'infinitive' expresses the fact that it is not limited in those circumstances that limit the other parts, which parts are called collectively the Finite verb.

The preposition 'to' is not essential to the infinitive and is dropped after certain verbs. The OE infinitive was formed by a suffix -an; as 'bindan' to bind, 'writan' to write. It was partially inflected like a noun taking a dative in -e after 'to' for the expression of purpose 'to bindanne' or -enne, 'to writanne' or -enne -- our gerund. By the 13th century the infin. -an had become weakened to -en and -e and sometimes the -e was silent; the dat. -anne, -enne had also fallen away to -ene, -en, -e; and to not only remained with the dat. or gerund meaning, but was also transferred to the simple infinitive. The two forms thus became identical and to now appears in the infin., whether it be nom, or obj, or dat.

The form binding, going is also an infinitive of the verb.

This form in -ing fulfils the function of a noun in the same manner as the other:' going (subj) is sad', 'he dreads going (obj); ' binding = (to bind) themselves by these terms was imprudent.'  This is the modern practical usage; and, in cases like the last, while we regard 'binding' as equivalent to a noun, being subject to 'was imprudent', we acknowledge its force as a verb by saying that 'themselves' is object to it.

History & Eytmology
Historically, the connexion between the old infin. in -en and the modern form in -ing is not quite satisfactorily established. In the 13th century, indeed, the participial termination -ende or -inde was occasionally used in place of the dat. infin. or gerund form; and in the 14th century both forms were sometimes turned into -ing. But presently this -ing infin. died out. Again an infin. -ing appears for -en about the beginning of the 16th century; but it is in a different construction from the modern use of -ing. In the same century even the -en of past participles was interchanged with -ing. Some stress might justly be laid on the strong tendency to convert all similar endings into -ing; but most probably the -ing should be traced to the verbal noun in -ung (later -ing), the preposition 'of' having dropt away, leaving the verbal noun and the following noun or pronoun in close proximity. According to this view, the real explanation of the above example is: binding (verbal noun); [of prep. omitted]; themselves (governed, not by binding, but by of). But, admitting this to be the historical origin of the -ing form in such constructions, the practical usage has broken quite away from it.

Supine:

(Latin supinus 'lying back; upturned') Abstract verbal form in Latin which is derived from verbs of motion. There are two types of supine in Latin: (a) supine I ends in -tum and has adjectival meaning, indicating a direction or purpose: Salutatum venire 'to come for the purpose of greeting'; (b) supine II ends in -u and appears after certain adjectives: Haec res est facilis intellectu 'This is easy to understand'. (There remains) much to be done.

'This is easy to understand'

'Understanding this is easy'?

Gerund
noun or adverb - purpose

Participle
adjective

Verbial
Verbials are abstract nouns formed from verbs.

Verbal nouns versus verb-derived nouns.

Two suffixes are used in Old English to form abstract nouns from verbs:


 * -aþ, -oþ (Gothic -oþu, OHG -od, Latin -atu), used in forming masculine abstract nouns from the second class of weak verbs:


 * -ung, more rarely -ing (Old Icelandic -ung, ing; OHG -ung, -unga), used in forming feminine abstract nouns, especially from the second class of weak verbs:

working notes
Another something to look into:  After certain modals, 'verbing' is possible but its equivalent is passive 'to be verbed':


 * The house needs repairing / to be repaired.


 * His hair needs cutting / needs to be cut.


 * It is worth reading / being read.

Instrumental case --


 * one of the 5 cases in Old English


 * root of modern 'why' but would have had meaning of 'how'


 * modern semantic translation would be:


 * by means of...


 * by way of...


 * by use of...


 * Potential examples:


 * He won the race cheating.


 * I met first saw the house trying to find a parking spot.


 * I got there on time speeding.


 * prefix be- also by- could also be seen as an instrumental prefix -- look up be- words

"    Instrument, means, manner. These senses of the dative overlap, and so are grouped together here. In Modern English we generally express these relations with prepositions like "with" and "by," e.g. "Ecgferth struck the king with his sword"; "He was wounded by a spear"; "We sing the mass with joy." In Old English, too, instrument, means and manner can be expressed with prepositions, especially mid and fram. But they are very commonly expressed by the dative alone, e.g. forþan ic hine sweorde swebban nelle, therefore I will not kill him with a sword; ðu scealt yfelum deaðe sweltan, you must die an evil death. This usage is especially common in poetry. To express the instrument, Old English may use the instrumental case (which exists only in the masculine and neuter singular), but it may equally well use the dative.

When translating the dative, it is often necessary to supply a preposition, because in Modern English prepositions very commonly express what used to be expressed by the dative alone. "

http://faculty.virginia.edu/OldEnglish/OEA/dative.html

Ablative absolute
The circumstances surrounding an action. E.g. Urbe captā, Aenēas fugit, "With the city having been captured, Aeneas fled." This is known as the ablative absolute.

Instrumental ablative
Some uses of the ablative descend from the Proto-Indo-European instrumental case.

Ablative of instrument
The means by which an action was carried out. E.g. oculīs vidēre, "to see with the eyes". This is known as the ablative of means or of instrument, and is equivalent to the instrumental case found in some other languages. Special deponent verbs in Latin sometimes use the ablative of means idiomatically. E.g. Ūtitur stilō literally says "he is benefiting himself by means of a pencil"; however, the phrase is more aptly translated "he is using a pencil."

Ablative of manner
The manner in which an action was carried out. The preposition cum (meaning "with") is used when (i) no adjective describes the noun E.g. cum cūrā, "with care," or (ii) optionally after the adjective(s) and before the noun  E.g. magnā (cum) celeritāte, "with great speed." This is known as the ablative of manner.

Ablative of attendant circumstances
Of kindred nature to this is the ablative of attendant circumstances "magno cum clamore civium ad urbem perveniunt" ("they reach the city to the great clamour of the populace")

Ablative of accompaniment
With whom something was done. Nouns in this construction are always accompanied by the preposition cum. E.g. cum eīs, "with them"; Cum amīcīs vēnērunt, "They came with friends." This is known as the ablative of accompaniment.

Ablative of agent
This can, however, be more generalized when the agent is an inanimate object. In this case, the preposition ab/ā/abs is not used. E.g. rex a militibus interfectus est "the king was killed by the soldiers" with personal agents, but impersonally it reads rex armis militum interfectus erat "the king was killed by the weapons of the soldiers." This is known as simply the ablative of agent, and also as the ablative of means or instrument.

(from WP article on latin ablatave)

Comparison of Non-Finite Modes:
=The Finite Modes=

Finite (from Latin adj. finitus meaning "bound", past participle of fīnīre "to bind") is the grammar and linguistic term for those modes of the verb which are bound to the verbal syntax of a verdict and always perform a verbal function within the verject of an utterance. Finite modes thus include only those forms whose use is limited to serving as auxiliaries or vectors within a verdict and who are limited to filling one of those two verbal functional roles (auxiliary or vector) within that verbal construction.

The finite modes provide a means of extending the root meaning of the verb to express extra-lexical verbal information via use of specific marked forms of the verb with each mode having its own unique set of verb forms. In English, each of the finite modes establish two subsets of verbal forms: the first based on combinations of person, number, & if applicable, formality; the second subset consists of four unique forms restricted to use as vectors in subordination to specific auxiliaries, and used in conjunction with those auxiliaries to convey verbal information in addition the primary lexical meaning of the vector such as aspect, perfection, evidentiality, modality, and voice. The names given the verb forms within these second subsets generally reflect name of the non-finite mode for which each specific structure is most commonly attributed. The traditional names for these forms are bare infinitive form ( verb  'walk', 'eat'), to-infinitive form ( to + verb  'to walk', 'to eat'), present participle form ( verb+ing  'walking', 'eating'), and past participle form ( verb+ed / verb+en  'walked', 'eaten').


 * Note: These subordinate forms are referred to by the name of the relevant non-finite mode + form.  It is important that this word 'form' always be included when referencing such verbs so as to prevent confusion with the actual non-finite modes  with whom they share a common structure.  Stating that a verb used in any of the finite modes appears in present participle form  or to-infinitive form  does not imply that such verbs are in fact participles or infinitives, but rather only that they appear in identical structure to that form most commonly expected of said infinitives and participles.

Substantive

 * Apposition


 * Copula

(below is my proposed rewrite of the page for auxiliary / auxiliary verb -- in progress)

In linguistics, an auxiliary (abbreviated ) is a word, phrase, or bound morpheme which conveys semantic information about its subordinate -- that functional syntactic unit immediately below the auxiliary in the syntactic hierarchy of the utterance in which it appears; In most SVO languages including English, the subordinate of an auxiliary is that unit to the immediate right of the auxiliary, be that subordinate an additional auxiliary or ultimately the vector (alternatively referred to as main verb, content verb, idea verb) which is the semantic head of the verdict (whole verb or verbal phrase (not to be confused with the generative syntactic term verb phrase which refers to the verdict plus the object of that verdict) with the verdict acting as a unit within the verject of an utterance, and  consisting of a single vector and all auxiliaries subordinating that vector). Auxiliaries handle agreement between subject and verdict for person and number. They convey information expressing mood, aspect, perfection, polarity, voice, and/or tense but do so with a weaker syntactic force than non-auxiliary syntactic units effecting these same types of information as an auxiliary may only affect its immediate subordinate whereas non-auxiliaries may affect another non-auxiliary, auxiliary, vector, verdict, entire verject, or any individual lexical component of these wholly or independently. For a syntactic unit expressing one or more of these types of information to be classified as an auxiliary, it must be part of one or more verdicts and must subordinate either one or more further auxiliaries or one or more vectors. Auxiliaries are alternatively referred to as helping verb, helper verb, or verbal auxiliary, and in referring to the aspectual auxiliary DO in English often erroneously as dummy verb.

=Morphology= Morphology of auxiliaries varies within a given language and from one language to another. There are morphologically two basic forms of auxiliary: verbal and conjugal. Verbal auxiliaries may be a single verb form, a fully declinable verb, or a phrase acting as a verbal unit which contains at least one verb which may have full or limited declination. Verbal auxiliaries act as independent unbound morphemes and only in special forms are they inflected onto the vector. Even in these inflected forms however the auxiliary is functionally independent with the inflected form acting merely as linguistic shorthand for the long form (see 'do' below).

Unlike verbal auxiliaries however, conjugal auxiliaries are never independent morphemes and always occur in inflected form, most often as affixes appended onto the root form of the vector they subordinate. They are classified as auxiliaries due to their semantic and syntactic roles yet are always inflected into their subordinate in that they carry verbal meaning independent of the verbal lexical qualities (aktionsart) of that subordinate. Examples of conjugal subordinates include verb endings which mark agreement for person, number, formality and express tense; they may also convey mood, aspect, perfection, voice, and polarity as emphasizing, countering, or adding such information inherent in the aktionsart of the subordinate. Consider the German verb spielen (play) (ich spiele, du spielst, er/sie/es spielt, wir spielen). The boldface type represents conjugal auxiliaries as endings conveying agreement for person and number. These are auxiliaries because German does not inflect the pronoun into the verb which means gives these endings a purely auxiliary verbal function.

=Syntax= An auxiliary is a semanto-syntactic functional unit within a verdict that acts independently, exhibits limited verb-like characteristics, and subordinates either the vector or another auxiliary and is either subordinated by another auxiliary or handles agreement for person and number (and when applicable, formality) with the subject and cannot itself act as vector. Auxiliaries may be either conjugal or verbal with each type having its own unique syntax but certain properties standard to all.

Syntactic Hierarchy
Auxiliaries must adhere to

examples in latin

Syntactic Hierarchy
Auxiliaries must adhere to

Syntactic Strength
=Types of Verbal Auxiliary=

Verbal auxiliaries may be grouped by structure, by strength, and by function.

Structure

 * 1) Single verb form
 * 2) *consist of a single undeclined verb
 * 3) declinable verb
 * 4) *single verb declined
 * 5) blah blah
 * 6) *kjkjwhkjewh

Strength

 * 1) Weak
 * 2) *lkjflskdjflskdjlkdsj
 * 3) Strong
 * 4) *lkjewlkjelk
 * 5) Very Strong
 * 6) *lkjlksdjflkdjs
 * 7) Neutral
 * 8) *lkflkdsjfldskj
 * 9) Somewhat Neutral
 * 10) *kjkjhdkjhd

Function

 * 1) Aspectual Auxiliaries
 * 2) Perfecting Auxiliaries
 * 3) Modal Auxiliaries
 * 4) Vocal Auxiliaries
 * 5) *Passive Voice

=Auxiliaries by Language=

Aspectual Auxiliaries

 * Do
 * Marks non-durational aspects
 * Be
 * Marks durational aspect

Perfecting Auxiliaries

 * Have

Modal Auxiliaries
kjkwejkewjhewkjh

Future-Marking Modal Auxiliaries

 * shall/will
 * kjksdjh

Vocal Auxiliaries

 * Be
 * passive voice

Auxiliaries in Spanish
=old article= In English, the extra meaning provided by an auxiliary verb alters the basic meaning of the main verb to make it have one or more of the following functions: passive voice, progressive aspect, perfect aspect, modality, or emphasis.

In English, every clause has a finite verb which consists of a main verb (a non-auxiliary verb) and optionally one or more auxiliary verbs, each of which is a separate word. Examples of finite verbs include write (no auxiliary verb), have written (one auxiliary verb), and have been written (two auxiliary verbs). Many languages, including English, feature some verbs that can act either as auxiliary or as main verbs, such as be ("I am writing a letter" vs "I am a postman") and have ("I have written a letter" vs "I have a letter"). In the case of be, it is sometimes ambiguous whether it is auxiliary or not; for example, "the ice cream was melted" could mean either "something melted the ice cream" (in which case melt would be the main verb) or "the ice cream was mostly liquid" (in which case be would be the main verb).

The primary auxiliary verbs in English are to be and to have; other major ones include shall, will, may and can.

Passive voice
The auxiliary verb be is used with a past participle to form the passive voice; for example, the clause "the door was opened" implies that someone (or something) opened it, without stating who (or what) it was. Because many past participles are also stative adjectives, the passive voice can sometimes be ambiguous; for example, "at 8:25, the window was closed" can be a passive-voice sentence meaning, "at 8:25, someone closed the window", or a non-passive-voice sentence meaning "at 8:25, the window was not open". Perhaps because of this ambiguity, the verb get is sometimes used colloquially instead of be in forming the passive voice, "at 8:25, the window got closed."

Progressive aspect
The auxiliary verb be is used with a present participle to form the progressive aspect; for example, "I am riding my bicycle" describes what the subject is doing at the given (in this case present) time without indicating completion, whereas "I ride my bicycle" is a temporally broader statement referring to something that occurs habitually in the past, present, and future. Similarly, "I was riding my bicycle" refers to the ongoing nature of what I was doing in the past, without viewing it in its entirety through completion, whereas "I rode my bicycle" refers either to a single past act viewed in its entirety through completion or to a past act that occurred habitually.

Perfect aspect
The auxiliary verb have is used with a past participle to indicate perfect aspect: a current state experienced by the subject as a result of a past action or state. For example, in "I have visited Paris" the current state is one of having a Paris visit in one's past, while the past action is visiting Paris. The past action may be ongoing, as in "I have been studying all night". An example involving the result of a past state rather than a past action is "I have known that for a long time", in which the past state still exists (I still know it) along with the resultant state (I am someone who knew that at some past time). An example involving the result of a past state that no longer exists is "I have felt bad in the past, but not recently". The alternative use of had instead of have places the perspective from which the resultant state is viewed in the past: "By 1985 I had visited Paris" describes the 1985 state of having a prior Paris visit.

Modality
Modality means the attitude of the speaker to the action or state being expressed, in terms of either degree of probability ("The sun must be down already", "The sun should be down already", "The sun may be down already", "The sun might be down already"), ability ("I can speak French"), or permission or obligation ("You must go now", "You should go now", "You may go now"). See modal verb and English modal verb.

Do: A modal representing real actions
Do also plays the role of modal auxiliary verb for sentences referring to completed (simple) actions. The basic job of a modal is to make actions into explanatory phrases. Unlike the other modal auxiliaries (have or be), "Do" is not used in affirmative statements because unlike in perfect or continuous, in the case of simple, the action actually does happen.

Continuous: He is driving the car (Because he is only in the process of this action, the verb here serves as a descriptive adjective}

Perfect: He has driven the car (Because the action took place earlier, the verb here only serves as an explanation for some aspect of the current situation. For example, this is why there is no gas in the tank.)

Simple: He drives a car (he completes this action every day- it is a real action (without a modal) because something did in fact occur during the moment being spoken of.)

Do is used in questions and negations however because in those cases, there is no real action, but rather only the "idea" of the action.

Statement: He drives the car (There is an action)

Question: Does he drive the car? (No action)

Negation: He does not drive the car (No action)

Emphasis
The auxiliaries do, does, and did are also used for emphasis in positive declarative statements in which the verb otherwise contains only one word: "I do like this shirt!", "He does like this shirt", "I did like that shirt".

Negation
Auxiliaries take not (or n't) to form the negative, e.g. cannot (can’t), will not (won’t), should not (shouldn’t), etc. In certain tenses, in questions, when a contracted auxiliary verb can be used, the position of the negative particle n't moves from the main verb to the auxiliary: cf. Does it not work? and Doesn't it work?.

Inversion
Auxiliaries invert to form questions:
 * "You will come."
 * "Will you come?"

Ellipsis
Auxiliaries can appear alone where a main verb has been omitted, but is understood:
 * "I will go, but she will not."

The verb do can act as a pro-VP (or occasionally a pro-verb) to avoid repetition:
 * "John never sings in the kitchen, but Mary does."
 * "John never sings in the kitchen, but Mary does in the shower."

Tag questions
Auxiliaries can be repeated at the end of a sentence, with negation added or removed, to form a tag question. In the event that the sentence did not use an auxiliary verb, a dummy auxiliary (a form of do) is used instead:
 * "You will come, won't you?"
 * "You ate, didn't you?"
 * "You won't (will not) come, will you?"
 * "You didn't (did not) eat, did you?"
 * "You (do) know how to dance, don't you?"

Similar negative auxiliary verbs are found in Nivkh and the Salish and Chimakuan languages formerly spoken in northwestern North America. Salish and Chimakuan languages also have interrogative auxiliary verbs that form questions in the same manner as negative verbs do negated statements.

Non-Indo-European languages
In many non-Indo-European languages, the functions of auxiliary verbs are largely or entirely replaced by suffixes on the main verb. This is especially true of epistemic possibility and necessity verbs, but extends to situational possibility and necessity verbs in many indigenous languages of North America, indigenous Australian languages and Papuan languages of New Guinea.

Hawaiian Creole English
In Hawaiian Creole English, a creole language based on a vocabulary drawn largely from English, auxiliaries are used for any of tense, aspect, and modality expression. The preverbal auxiliary wen indicates past tense (Ai wen see om "I saw him"). The future marker is the preverbal auxiliary gon or goin "am/is/are going to": gon bai "is going to buy". These tense markers indicate relative tense: that is, past or future time relative to some benchmark that may or may not be the speaker's present (e.g., Da gai sed hi gon fiks mi ap "the guy said he [was] gonna fix me up".   There are various preverbal modal auxiliaries: kaen "can", laik "want to", gata "have got to", haeftu "have to", baeta "had better", sapostu "am/is/are supposed to".  Waz "was" can indicate past tense before the future marker gon and the modal sapostu: Ai waz gon lift weits "I was gonna lift weights"; Ai waz sapostu go "I was supposed to go". There is a preverbal auxiliary yustu for past tense habitual aspect : yustu tink so "used to think so". The progressive aspect can be marked with the auxiliary ste in place of or in addition to the verbal suffix -in: Wat yu ste it? = Wat yu itin? "What are you eating?" Ste can alternatively indicate perfective aspect: Ai ste kuk da stu awredi "I cooked the stew already". Stat is an auxiliary for inchoative aspect when combined with the verbal suffix -in: gon stat plein "gonna start playing". The auxiliary pau without the verbal suffix indicates completion: pau tich "finish(ed) teaching". Aspect auxiliaries can co-occur with tense-marking auxiliaries: gon ste plei "gonna be playing"; wen ste it "was eating".

Hawaiian
Hawaiian is an isolating language, so its verbal grammar exclusively relies on unconjugated auxiliary verbs. It has indicative and imperative moods, the imperative indicated by e + verb (or in the negative by mai + verb). In the indicative its verbs can optionally be marked by ua + verb (perfective aspect, but frequently replaced by the unmarked form); ke + verb + nei (present tense progressive aspect; very frequently used); and e + verb + ana (imperfective aspect, especially for non-present time).

Mandarin Chinese
In Mandarin Chinese, another isolating language, auxiliary verbs are distinguished from adverbs in that (1) yes-no questions can be answered with subject + auxiliary (e.g., Nǐ néng lái ma?  Wǒ néng "Can you come? I can" is correct) but not with subject + adverb (e.g., Nǐ yídìng lái ma?  Wǒ yídìng "Will you definitely come? I definitely" is incorrect), and (2) an auxiliary but not an adverb can be used in the yes-or-no construction verb + "not" + verb (as in Nǐ néng bu néng lái? "you can not can come?").

In Mandarin the auxiliary verbs have six properties that distinguish them from main verbs: :


 * They must co-occur with a verb (or an understood verb).
 * They cannot be accompanied by aspect markers.
 * They cannot be modified by intensifiers such as "very".
 * They cannot be nominalized (used in phrases meaning, for example, "one who can")
 * They cannot occur before the subject.
 * They cannot take a direct object.

The auxiliary verbs in Mandarin include three meaning "should", four meaning "be able to", two meaning "have permission to", one meaning "dare", one meaning "be willing to", four meaning "have to", and one meaning either "will" or "know how".