The termpredicate is used in two ways inlinguistics and its subfields. The first defines a predicate as everything in a standarddeclarative sentence except thesubject, and the other defines it as only the main content verb or associated predicative expression of aclause. Thus, by the first definition, the predicate of the sentenceFrank likes cake islikes cake, while by the second definition, it is only the content verblikes, andFrank andcake are thearguments of this predicate. The conflict between these two definitions can lead to confusion.[1]
The notion of a predicate intraditional grammar traces back toAristotelian logic.[2] A predicate is seen as a property that a subject has or is characterized by. A predicate is therefore an expression that can betrue of something.[3] Thus, the expression "is moving" is true of anything that is moving. This classical understanding of predicates was adopted more or less directly into Latin and Greek grammars; from there, it made its way into English grammars, where it is applied directly to the analysis of sentence structure. It is also the understanding of predicates as defined in English-language dictionaries. The predicate is one of the two main parts of asentence (the other being thesubject, which the predicatemodifies).[a] The predicate must contain averb, and the verb requires or permits other elements to complete the predicate, or else precludes them from doing so. These elements areobjects (direct, indirect, prepositional),predicatives, andadjuncts:
Shedances.— Verb-only predicate.
Benreads the book.— Verb-plus-direct-object predicate.
Ben's mother, Felicity,gave me a present.— Verb-plus-indirect-object-plus-direct-object predicate.
Shelistened to the radio.— Verb-plus-prepositional-object predicate.
Sheis in the park.— Verb-plus-predicative-prepositional-phrase predicate.
Shemet him in the park.— Verb-plus-direct-object-plus-adjunct predicate.
The predicate provides information about the subject, such as what the subject is, what the subject is doing, or what the subject is like. The relation between a subject and its predicate is sometimes called anexus. Apredicative nominal is anoun phrase: in the sentenceGeorge III is the king of England, the phrasethe king of England is the predicative nominal. In English, the subject and predicative nominal must be connected by alinking verb, also called acopula. Apredicative adjective is anadjective, such as inIvano is attractive,attractive being the predicative adjective. The subject and predicative adjective must also be connected by a copula.
Some theories of syntax adopt a subject-predicate distinction. For instance, a textbookphrase structure grammar typically divides an English declarative sentence (S) into anoun phrase (NP) andverb phrase (VP).[4] The subject NP is shown in green, and the predicate VP in blue. Languages with more flexible word order (often callednonconfigurational languages) are often also treated differently in phrase structure approaches.[citation needed]
On the other hand,dependency grammar rejects the binary subject-predicate division and places thefinite verb as the root of the sentence. The matrix predicate is marked in blue, and its two arguments are in green. While the predicate cannot be construed as a constituent in the formal sense, it is acatena. Barring adiscontinuity, predicates and their arguments are always catenae in dependency structures.[5]
Some theories of grammar accept both a binary division of sentences into subject and predicate while also giving thehead of the predicate a special status. In such contexts, the termpredicator is used to refer to that head.[6]
There are cases in which the semantic predicand has a syntactic function other than subject. This happens inraising constructions, such as the following:
What
makes
you
think
that?
OBJ
Here,you is the object of themakeverb phrase, the head of the main clause, but it is also thepredicand of the subordinatethink clause, which has no subject.[7]: 329–335
The termpredicate is also used to refer toproperties and to words or phrases which denote them. This usage of the term comes from the concept of apredicate inlogic. In logic, predicates are symbols which areinterpreted asrelations orfunctions overarguments. Insemantics, thedenotations of some linguistic expressions are analyzed along similar lines. Expressions which denote predicates in the semantic sense are sometimes themselves referred to as "predication".[8]
The seminal work of Greg Carlson distinguishes between types of predicates.[9] Based on Carlson's work, predicates have been divided into the following subclasses, which roughly pertain to how a predicate relates to its subject.
Astage-level predicate is true of atemporal stage of its subject. For example, if John is "hungry", then he typically will eat some food. His state of being hungry therefore lasts a certain amount of time, and not his entire lifespan. Stage-level predicates can occur in a wide range of grammatical constructions and are probably the most versatile kind of predicate.
Anindividual-level predicate is true throughout the existence of an individual. For example, if John is "smart", this is a property that he has, regardless of which particular point in time we consider. Individual-level predicates are more restricted than stage-level ones. Individual-level predicates cannot occur inpresentational "there" sentences (a star in front of a sentence indicates that it is odd or ill-formed):
There are policeavailable.—available is stage-level predicate.
*There are firemenaltruistic.—altruistic is an individual-level predicate.
Stage-level predicates allow modification by manner adverbs and other adverbial modifiers. Individual-level predicates do not, e.g.
Tyronespoke French loudly in the corridor.—speak French can be interpreted as a stage-level predicate.
*Tyroneknew French silently in the corridor.—know French cannot be interpreted as a stage-level predicate.
When an individual-level predicate occurs inpast tense, it gives rise to what is called alifetime effect: The subject must be assumed to be dead or otherwise out of existence.
Johnwas available.— Stage-level predicate does NOT evoke the lifetime effect.
Johnwas altruistic.— Individual-level predicate does evoke the lifetime effect.
Akind-level predicate is true of akind of a thing, but cannot be applied to individual members of the kind. An example of this is the predicateare widespread. One cannot meaningfully say of a particular individual John that he is widespread; one may only say this of kinds, as in
Catsare widespread.
Certain types ofnoun phrases cannot be the subject of a kind-level predicate. We have just seen that aproper name cannot be.Singularindefinite noun phrases are also banned from this environment:
*A catis widespread.— Compare:Nightmares are widespread.
Predicates may also be collective or distributive. Collective predicates require their subjects to be somehow plural, while distributive ones do not. An example of a collective predicate is "formed a line". This predicate can only stand in a nexus with a plural subject:
The studentsformed a line.— Collective predicate appears with plural subject.
*The studentformed a line.— Collective predicate cannot appear with singular subject.
Other examples of collective predicates includemeet in the woods,surround the house,gather in the hallway andcarry the piano together. Note that the last one (carry the piano together) can be made non-collective by removing the wordtogether.Quantifiers differ with respect to whether or not they can be the subject of a collective predicate. For example, quantifiers formed withall the can, while ones formed withevery oreach cannot.
All the studentsformed a line.— Collective predicate possible withall the.
All the studentsgathered in the hallway.— Collective predicate possible withall the.
All the studentscarried a piano together.— Collective predicate possible withall the.
*Every studentformed a line.— Collective predicate impossible withevery.
*Each studentgathered in the hallway.— Collective predicate impossible witheach.
Langendoen, T. (1970).The study of syntax: The generative-transformational approach to the study of English. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Lockwood, D. (2002).Syntactic analysis and description: A constructional approach. London: continuum.
Matthews, P. (1981).Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCawley, T. (1988).The syntactic phenomena of English. Vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
The Merriam Webster Dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster. 2004.
Napoli, D. (1989).Predication theory: A case study for indexing theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Napoli, D. (1993).Syntax: Theory and problems. New York: Oxford University Press.
Osborne, T.; Putnam, M.; Groß, T. (2012). "Catenae: Introducing a novel unit of syntactic analysis".Syntax.15 (4):354–396.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9612.2012.00172.x.
Oxford Concise dictionary of Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press. 1997.
Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press. 2014.
Parisi, D.; Antinucci, F. (1976).Essentials of grammar. Translated by Bates, E. New York: Academic Press.
van Riemsdijk, H.; Williams, E. (1986).Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Thomas, L. (1993).Beginning syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.
