User:Drew.ward/sandbox2

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