Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 9 Mar 1999 17:04:19 -0800 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In revising my own list of basic sentence patterns, I am ready to join
Martha Kolln and others in seeing subject+BE+adverb of time* or place as
a pattern:
John is here.
John is in the kitchen.
Would I be drummed out of the profession if I called that adverb a
complement because it completes its verb as much as subject complements
or direct objects complete their verbs?
MIchael Kischner
*Actually, I can't think of an adverb of time that goes comfortably in
that slot. "Choir practice is on Thursdays" doesn't seem to cut it; in
that sentence, BE seems to be just a shortcut for HAPPEN or OCCUR. I know
that something similar is said of BE with an adverb of place -- that BE
then means EXIST. But this isn't my main question.
|
|
|