Inversions in Modern English
Автор работы: Пользователь скрыл имя, 24 Декабря 2014 в 16:18, курсовая работа
Описание работы
This project is devoted to the problem of inversion in modern English language. Being a
language phenomenon, inversion presents huge interest for linguists and other language scientists
as its character is very complicated and is not completely explored. Because of its complexity,
inversion has generated a large amount of research.
Содержание работы
INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………...4
Chapter I. WHAT IS MODERN ENGLISH INVERSION? .......................................................... 2
1.1. DEFINITION AND GENERAL TYPOLOGY ............................................................... 2
1.2. PREVIOUS RESEARCH ................................................................................................ 6
1.3. PROBLEMS................................................................................................................... 13
Chapter II. INVERSION: FOCUS ON THE WEIGHT OF THE SENTENCE........................... 15
2.1. BALANCE INVERSION .............................................................................................. 16
2.2. INVERSION IN RELATIVE CLAUSES...................................................................... 20
Chapter III. TYPES OF INVERSION: FOCUS ON GRAMMATICAL PRINCIPLES OF WORDORDER.........................................................................................................................................
21
3.1. SUBJECT-VERB INVERSION .................................................................................... 22
3.2. SUBJECT-OPERATOR INVERSION.......................................................................... 25
Chapter IV. INVERSION AS GROUND-BEFORE-FIGURE ISTANTIATION ....................... 31
CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................. 34
BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................................
Файлы: 1 файл
FEDERAL AGENCY ON EDUCATION
STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF HIGHER PROFESSIONAL
EDUCATION “SHUВA STATE PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITВ”
DEPARTMENT OF ROMANO-GERMANIC LANGUAGES
AND DIDACTICS
Term paper
for the course of Theoretical Grammar
THE PROBLEM OF INVERSION IN MODERN ENGLISH LANGUAGE
Presented by:
Roman O. Lesnov,
3d-year Specialist Degree student
majoring in TEFL
Thesis advisor:
Senior Instructor Smolina L.U.
Shuya
2011
1
INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………...4
Chapter I. WHAT IS MODERN ENGLISH INVERSION? .......................................................... 2
1.1. DEFINITION AND GENERAL TYPOLOGY ............................................................... 2
1.2. PREVIOUS RESEARCH ................................................................................................ 6
1.3. PROBLEMS................................................................................................................... 13
Chapter II. INVERSION: FOCUS ON THE WEIGHT OF THE SENTENCE........................... 15
2.1. BALANCE INVERSION .............................................................................................. 16
2.2. INVERSION IN RELATIVE CLAUSES...................................................................... 20
Chapter III. TYPES OF INVERSION: FOCUS ON GRAMMATICAL PRINCIPLES OF WORD-
ORDER......................................................................................................................................... 21
3.1. SUBJECT-VERB INVERSION .................................................................................... 22
3.2. SUBJECT-OPERATOR INVERSION.......................................................................... 25
Chapter IV. INVERSION AS GROUND-BEFORE-FIGURE ISTANTIATION ....................... 31
CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................. 34
BIBLIOGRAPHY......................................................................................................................... 35
2
INTRODUCTION
This project is devoted to the problem of inversion in modern English language. Being a
language phenomenon, inversion presents huge interest for linguists and other language scientists
as its character is very complicated and is not completely explored. Because of its complexity,
inversion has generated a large amount of research. There exist numerous studies on inversion
among which one can find outstanding works of such distinguished researchers as Emonds,
Coopmans, Birner, Dorgeloh, Green who tried to demonstrate features of inversion from different
positions.
The aim of this work is, having made a careful study of the previous research and by the
author’s own investigation, to demonstrate:
the problems of inversion topical for modern English language, the ways to solve them;
functions of inversion;
all the types of inversive utterances and analyze them.
Grammatical inversion which is a norm of interrogative constructions is not the object of
this work, but the functional device of inversion is its central question. Thus the subject of this
scientific research is different models of the effect of the inversive sentences and the object of the
research is inversive models of modern English speech.
Among methods of analysis the preference is given to the contextual stylistic, functional and
grammatical ones. The course work consists of the introduction, the theoretical section, and the
conclusion. The theoretical section first of all deals with roles of inversion and with different
approaches to the classification of inversion, among which are two main branches: due to its
functional effect and to the grammatical organization of word-order. The final general inference
can be found in the conclusion.
Chapter I. WHAT IS MODERN ENGLISH INVERSION?
1.1. DEFINITION AND GENERAL TYPOLOGY
There is no doubt that inversion occupies a central position in linguistics. As such, it has
been a fascination for linguists and a testing ground for theories of language. Inversion is a very
complicated phenomenon and it is true to say that it presents quite interesting a problem to be
discussed. ThО tОrm ‘ТnvОrsТon’ has bООn usОН as an umbrОlla tОrm Пor a largО varТОtв oП
syntactically quite different constructions. Green, for example, claims that there exist on the order
of 20 to 40 types of inverted sentences in English. Accordingly, some definitions are fairly broad,
thereby including subject-auxiliary inversion and even existential there-constructions. Birner offers
a more restrictive definition:
3
“An INVERSION Тs a sОntОnМО Тn аhТМh thО logТМal subУОМt appОars Тn post-verbal position
while some other, canonically post-verbal, constituent appears in clause-ТnТtТal posТtТon.” [4, p. 12]
In a similar way, Dorgeloh states: “Full ТnvОrsТon НОnotОs all thosО МonstruМtТons Тn аhТМh thО
subject follows all of its verb phrase, i.e. a full (lexical) verb or copular be.” [6, p. 23]. It should be
noted that DorgОloh’s НОПТnТtТon (anН BТrnОr’s too) ОбМluНОs subУОМt-auxiliary inversions, as in such
cases, the subject is put in a position after the auxiliary but in front of the remaining constituents of
the verb phrase (see the example 1.1a). The subject-auxiliary inversion will be explored by us in the
next chapters of this work as we think it also determines some rules in the understanding of the
nature of inversion.
(1.1a)
Had I been there, it wouldn’t have happened.
As a construction, inversion is unique in that it is the only construction that alters the SV
order of English. It owes its very existence to the development and evolution of English, from being
a synthetic (Old English) to an analytical (modern English) language. A brief outline of this
development can make some background for inversion in modern English. As well-known, the
word order of OE is relatively free, more or less like a word order of Latin. It relies chiefly on
inflectional morphology; however three patterns of word order have been generalized from OE
texts (‘S’ mОans subУОМt, ‘O’ – obУОМt, ‘V’ – vОrb, ‘Б’ – auбТlТarв, ‘OE’ – Old English.):
SV(O)
- became the word order of modern English, in large part due to the loss of the
languagО’s rТМh ТnПlОМtТonal morphologв;
S(O)V
- has been grammaticalized in Dutch and German, disappeared completely from
English;
XVS
- has bООn “rОanalвгОН Тn somОthТng ОlsО” anН “bОМamО lТmТtОН to narroа НomaТns”
(Stockwell), it has resulted in a number of grammaticalized inverted structures, all of
which are subject-auxiliary inversions, with initial negatives, affectives and
interrogatives as their preverbal elements. [9]
Under the definition above and with the exclusion of there-insertion, inversions fall into the
following categories which can be distinguished on the basis of the form of the preposed
МonstТtuОnt. DuО to thО lТmТtОН volumО oП thТs аork I’ll НОsМrТbО thОm vОrв brТОПlв, bв mОans oП a
table design (see table 1).
Table 1
Category /
Preposed element
Features
Example
PP-Inversion /
Prepositional phrase
The only kind of inversion that
rarely occurs with BE.
Is usuallв МallОН ‘loМatТvО’
inversion
From the darkness between the
semi-detached houses across the
street came the familiar figure of
Jack Stone.
4
Past-Inversion /
Participle
Inversions with preposed present
participle or past participle forms
Lying inside, wrapped in a clean
woolen shawl, was the smallest
baby I had ever seen.
AdjP-Inversion /
Adjective phrase
Fronted comparative and positive
adjectives
Visibly evident was the profusion of
this work
AdvP-Inversion /
Adverb phrase
Here before me were two people in
love, oh yes.
NP-Inversion /
Noun phrase
NP – V – NP: a phenomenon
An early contributor was Wilcock.
My friend is Jack.
Quotation Inversion
/ Quotation
Proposing a quotation which
functions as the object of the clause
“I’ll find the way out”, says
Lemmer.
As opposed to other types of inversion, NP-Inversion involves both a preposed NP and a
postposed NP and presents a very interesting problem: the evidence/non-evidence of the subject
status of the postposed NP. If the two NPs stand in an identification relationship, it is usually not
possible to decide which of the two is the subject of the clause and which the complement is. Birner
saвs that “thО qualТtв oП propОrtв bОТng prОНТМatОН Тs rОprОsОntОН bв thО prО-copular rather than
post-copular phrase, while the NP subject of which this property is being predicated appears in
post-Мopular posТtТon”. [4, p. 46] It therefore seems reasonable to regard the preposed constituent as
the subject complement and the postposed one as the subject. Accordingly, constructions as the
ones exemplified will be counted as inversions.
Additionally there are some controversial points on inversion that presents questions to be
discussed. They are there-insertion and fronting (preposing).
There-insertions fit the definitions of inversion given above: the logical subject appears in
post-verbal position and a canonically post-verbal constituent occurs in initial position.
Many authors assume strong links between there-insertion and full inversion, claiming that
there-insertion is a kind of locative inversion. Controversially, some other researchers
distinguish them (Birner, Dorgeloh).
“HartvТgson and Jakobsen (1974: 62), for example, treat both inversion (1.1b) and
there-insertion (1.1c) as “a mОans oП sОМurТng basТМ НТstrТbutТon oП CommunТМatТvО
DвnamТsm”. Д9, p. 62] Full inversion and there-insertion are said not to differ in distribution
of Communicative Dynamism but in relations to style: the former is stylistically marked in
5
that “Тt oММurs МhТОПlв Тn ПaТrlв Пormal аrТtТng anН vОrв Пormal spООМh”. The latter, on the
othОr hanН Тs takОn to bО stвlТstТМallв unmarkОН.” [9, p. 12]
(1.1b) On the sideboard is whisky.
(1.1c) On the sideboard there is whisky.
Note that cases of there-insertion involve significant changes in the function of the
preposed phrase: the preposed constituent will no longer be understood as a subject
complement but as disjunct and would typically be separated by a comma in writing and a
pause in speaking (see 1.1d and 1.1e).
(1.1d) More important was his role as a linkman.
(1.1e) More important, there was his role as a linkman. [9]
Also there-insertion does not seem to be related to non-locative inversion, it might
still be regarded as a variant of locative inversion. In this case, as Birner points out, we
would expect to find the two constructions either in free variation or in complementary
distribution. However, Birner shows that the corpus data do not seem to hint at any kind of
regularities concerning the use of two variants: not all instances of locative inversion are
equally acceptable with there-insertion and not all cases of there-insertion are acceptable
without there; nevertheless there are a number of cases where both variants seem well-
ПormОН. AММorНТnglв, BТrnОr МonМluНОs: “SТnМО loМatТvО ТnvОrsТon anН there-insertion with a
preposed locative are neither in free variation nor in complementary distribution, it seems
likely that they are distinct constructions governed by distinct sets of rules, resulting in a
partТal ovОrlap oП МontОбts oП applТМatТon”. [4, p. 29]
The requirements (Birner and Ward, 1998) for there-insertion include: (i) the
postposed element needs to be new either with regard to the discourse of the hearer, and (ii)
thО prОposОН МonstТtuОnt nООНs to stanН Тn a ‘sТlОnt rОlatТonshТp’ to an ОlОmОnt Тn thО
preceding discourse. In contrast, inversion is sensitive to the relative information status of
the moved constituents in that the preposed constituent must not be newer than the
postposed one. It follows that cases of felicitous there-insertion are also felicitous
ТnvОrsТons; thО rОvОrsО, hoаОvОr, НoОsn’t holН. In sum, it seems reasonable to treat there-
insertion as a phenomenon in its own right and exclude it from the present analysis.
Fronting (Preposing). Preposing (fronted) constructions are those sentences in which a
canonically post-verbal constituent is put in sentence-initial position, as in the examples
below. Fronting is closely connected with inversion but, in contrast to it, fronting does not
involve the placing of the logical subject in post-verbal position, i.e. subject and verb remain
in the same position relative to each other. Furthermore, fronting is found with a large
variety of syntactic structures. While inversion is restricted to intransitive or copular verbs,
6
fronting occurs freely with all kinds of verbs. Accordingly, the preposed constituent may be
of any functional class, i.e. direct/indirect object, subject or obligatory adverbial.
(1.1f) One of those black and white houses it is.
(1.1g) Vandalism, the council called it.
(1.1h) More on her neck it must have been.
According to the existed stream of research (Halliday, Creider, Gundel and others),
fronting used to be regarded as a monolithic construction mainly serves a topic-making and
a focus-making functions. But later, over the last decades, it was suggested (Prince, Ward,
Birner) that a fronted constituent presents a sort of a discourse-link, that situates information
with respect to the prior context, i.e. a link between the previous discourse and the present
sentence. [9, p. 99-100] The question concerning fronting (preposing) is very interesting,
also because it can be regarded as a part or a step of inversion, but this problem would find
its solution in a single study out of this work.
1.2. PREVIOUS RESEARCH
The literature on inversion is extensive and quite diverse. This is most probably due to the
diversity of the phenomenon itself. For example, Green (1985) distinguishes 20 to 40 types of
inversions. Similarly, Erdman (1979), in a taxonomic study of inversion, discerns some 30 to 40
different categories. Accordingly, different aspects of different subtypes of inversion have been
studied. Among these, three areas can be distinguished that have received most attention in
previous research: subject-operator inversion, quotation inversion, and inversion with preposed
locative adverbial. A fourth area of research, preposings around BE, seems to have received less
attention in previous studies. Subject-operator inversion and quotation inversion will not be
explored in this chapter; findings on these topics will be made in chapter 3 of this study. At the
centre of the following discussion will be the more functionally oriented approaches. On the whole,
the discussions of the various approaches are short and usually highlight only those aspects that are
of immediate understanding to the features of inversion.
Inversions as root transformations
In particular the status of inversion as root transformation has been discussed extensively in
transformational literature. The concept of root transformation was introduced into transformational
literature by Emonds in the larger context of the structure-preserving constraint and derives its
name from the fact that it "moves, copies, or inserts a node C into a position in which C is immedi-
ately dominated by a root S in derived structure". [7, p. 3] In other words, root transformations
7
apply only to the matrix clause and not to embedded clauses. A large variety of constructions, such
as Subject-Auxiliary inversion, tag question, or right and left dislocation can be described as root
transformations, among them directional adverb preposing and preposing around BE. Adverb
preposing, in Emonds' view "seems limited to exclamatory statements" [7, p. 4], such as those
exemplified below:
(1.2a)
Down the street rolled the baby carriage!
Underlying this construction, however, is not one transformation but two: "the first is the preposing
of the adverbial PP, which is perhaps part of some other rule, and the second is the movement of
the simple verb into second position". [7, p. 15] Since both transformations are root
transformations, the resulting directional adverb inversion is a root-transformation, too.
The class of preposings around BE comprises three distinct movement rules. One of these is
'participle preposing', as exemplified in (1.2b).
(1.2b)
Speaking at today's lunch will be our local congressman.
While Emonds regards participle preposing as exhibiting "root transformation behavior quite
clearly" [7, p. 36] in not being allowed in embedded clauses, Green (1976) offers examples of
participle preposing within subordinate clauses, thus, rendering the status of this type of inversion
problematic, for example:
(1.2c)
John knew that squatting in the corner was a spotted tree frog.
Problematic, too, in the context of root transformations are two other subclasses of
preposings around BE, since, according to Emonds [7, p.34] they can occur in embedded sentences
"
SOMETIMES
and
FOR SOME SPEAKERS ONLY
". The preposing of the AdjP in (1.2d), for example,
seems ungrammatical in some contexts of embedding (1.2d.1) but may be marginally acceptable in
others (1.2d.2).
(1.2d)
More important has been the establishment of legal services.
(1.2d.1) Bill wonders why more important has been the establishment of legal
services.
(1.2d.2) We convinced the authorities that more important has been the establishment
of legal services. [7, p.35]
Similarly, the preposing of PPs around
BE
is acceptable in some embedded sentences but not
in others:
(1.2e)
Among the guests were (sat) John and his family.
(1.2e.1) I have no idea how often among the guests were (sat) John and his family. [7,
p.37]
8
It has been shown that there are a number of ОбМОptТons to EmonН’s analвsТs and that the
conditions that allow for the embedding of root transformations are quite complex and call for
clarification. Attempts of explanation are diverse and employ morphological, syntactic and
pragmatic arguments. There is no need to discuss all of the various approaches in detail. EmonН’s
root transformation is seriously challenged, although it continued to be assumed as valid by later
writers.
Information packaging approaches
As one of the main factors with regard to word order variation phenomena in general, the
influence of information status has also been analyzed in the context of inversion. In particular,
inversion is regarded as a means to maintain (or retrieve) the order of given before new
information. Hartvigson and Jakobsen (1974), for example, claim that, among other factors, in-
version may be "provoked by the weight distribution in the clause". In their analysis, 'weight' either
refers to 'formal' weight (i.e. syntactic complexity) or 'notional' weight (i.e. information content or
news value). The latter is defined in terms of Firbas' notion of Communicative Dynamism (CD), i.e.
the more a sentence element contributes to the development of the communication, the higher will
be the degree of CD carried by that sentence element. In their account, inversion seems to be
understood as a two-step process: a non-subject may be fronted due to its lack of CD and,
subsequently, subject and verb may change place depending on the relative weight of the two.
While the first step explains the positioning of the adverbial in (1.2f), the latter accounts for the
difference in verb positioning in (1.2g):
(1.2f.1) There is whisky on the sideboard.
(1.2f.2) On the sideboard (there) is whisky.
(1.2g.1) [...]; and here in a sudden tangle of brambles the scent of a fox hung,too
heavy today to rise or dissipate.
(1.2g.2) Behind Welch's head hung the departmental timetable drawn up by Welch…
A slightly different stance is taken by Penhallurick (1984). In his view, inversion does not
primarily serve to propose a non-subject with a low degree of CD; its main function lies in
postposing a subject with a high degree of CD. The primary element in the subject appearing after
the lexical verb in full-verb inversion is that it represents new information, we see the 'new' status
of the subject as a necessary condition for full-verb inversion. [9] Inversion is thus regarded as one
possТblО аaв oП mООtТng ‘rОquТrОmОnts oП proМОssТng’. Since, according to Penhallurick, subjects in
inverted sentences are always 'new', they carry the tonic and are not realized by pronouns. In
addition, Penhallurick regards inversion as a defocusing device. His use of 'focus' seems to come
9
close to what more commonly is referred to as 'topic', namely what the speaker's attention is
centered on in relation to the event specified by the verb. This function is closely connected to the
canonical position of the subject, i.e. in front of the lexical verb. Through inversion, the subject of
the clause is removed from this position and will usually not remain in focus for the following
discourse. This assumption, however, seems to run counter to what was said above: if inversion
introduces new entities in the discourse it would be strange not to find these entities after the
inversion. And indeed, as the examples below show, entities referred to by the postposed subject
may quite naturally form part of the following text.
(1.2h)
Standing next to the netted window was a young boy. He was leaning on a
wooden sill, writing intently. Ayoung man in his twenties, with short cropped
hair and glasses was sitting behind the netting talking to him. "They'll never
read that," he said. "Yes, they will," the boy replied.
“A further analysis which employs the notion of 'focus' is Rochemont (1986). He treats
inversion as a focusing construction, since "a rightward moved phrase must be interpreted as a
focus in any context in which a sentence so constructed is uttered".
(1.2i)
Into the forest ran ROBIN HOOD.
(1.2j)
Sitting on the bed was his long lost BROTHER. [9, p.26]
Although for Rochemont "focus is a syntactic notion" it also entails "a semantic interpretation". [9,
p.26] Two kinds of foci can be identified, namely presentational and contrastive foci. Both can be
defined with regard to the distribution of information. Even without going into detail about the two
types of foci, it is quite clear that in Rochemont's analysis the focus constituent essentially conveys
new information. This view has not gone unchallenged.
Birner suggests a different solution to the above problem. In a series of publications, she
contends that the felicity of inversion does not depend on the newness of the postposed NP but on
"the relative familiarity of the postposed subject and the preposed element" [4, p.72]. In particular,
the information represented by the preposed constituent must at least be as familiar within the
discourse as is that represented by the postposed constituent. Accordingly, she regards inversion as
an information packaging device which helps the speaker/writer "to avoid presenting unfamiliar
information before familiar information" (and which links "unfamiliar information to the prior
context through the clause-initial placement of information that is relatively familiar in the
discourse". [4, p.130]
Underlying Birner's conception of information status is Prince's (1981) notion of givenness
as assumed familiarity. Relative familiarity or unfamiliarity of a linguistic item is assessed on the
basis of the following scale:
Evoked > Unused > Inferrable > Containing Inferrable > Brand-New
10
Anchored > Brand-New.
Inversion thus is felicitous if the preposed constituent does not rank lower
on the above scale as the postposed constituent; consider example (1.2k):
(1.2k)
The most visually enticing selection is the chocolate "delice": a hatbox-
shaped dessert made of dark chocolate and filled with berries and white
chocolate mousse. Surrounding the creation is a mosaic of four fruit sauces.
The preposed constituent in (1.2k) contains at least an evoked NP, namely ‘the creation’ and may
thus be regarded as ranking higher on Prince's scale of assumed familiarity than the brand-new
‘mosaic of four fruit sauces’; hence the inversion is felicitous. However, examples also are found
that do not seem to fit into Prince's scale as nicely. One such problematic class is illustrated by the
example below, where one constituent contains unused information, i.e. information that is known
to the reader but has not yet been referred to in the discourse:
(1.2l)
Yet another massive steel fireplace, the grate concealed by a low screen of
floral design. Above the mantel stood the youthful Queen Victoria.
(1.2m)
Nusseibeh's unusual predicament causes concern all around. His friends fear
that Arab hard-liners will turn on Nusseibeh, thinking he is an Israeli ally.
The Israelis, who […], are under intense pressure from the United States not
to jail moderates who may figure in their election proposal for the territories
occupied since the 1967 war. Most immediately affected is Nusseibeh
himself. [4, p.86]
Similarly to example (1.2l), in (1.2m) the postposed constituent is textually evoked while the
preposed ‘most immediately affected’ is inferrable if we assume that the reader can expect that the
situation in the West Bank and Gaza will affect someone. On Prince's scale of assumed familiarity,
however, evoked information ranks higher than inferrable information; the inversion in (1.2m)
would thus be infelicitous, which, obviously, is not the case. “Birner claims that the answer to this
riddle lies in the dual nature of inferrables, as pointed out by Prince (1992: 309): "they are
technically Hearer-new and Discourse-new but depend upon beliefs assumed to be Hearer-old [...
and upon] some trigger entity which is itself Discourse-old." [9, p.29] In addition, the distribution
of evoked and inferrable elements show striking similarities: "the two behave as members of the
same class". [4, p.95] Accordingly Birner suggests "that inferrable information may be collapsible
with evoked information for purposes of determining the felicity of inversion - specifically, that
inferrable information may also be treated as discourse-old". [4, p.95]
On the whole, the findings of Hartvigson and Jakobsen, Pennhallurick, Rochemont and
Birner draw a fairly conclusive picture as to the importance of information status of inversion.
However, it may be doubted if the information patterning in inversions can indeed be captured as
11
neatly as Birner suggests, namely that "the proposed element in an inversion must not be newer in
the discourse than the postposed element". [4, p.90] Underlying Birner's results is Prince's scale of
assumed familiarity which, although widely acknowledged as a tool for capturing information
states, nevertheless involves a high degree of subjectivity in application to real language data. Most
problematic in this respect are inferrable entities: many of the inverted elements could not be
classified with regard to their information status. This may pose a threat to the exclusiveness of
BТrnОr’s pragmatic constraint.
Textual and discourse-related approaches
A number of textual approaches to inversion focus on cases where the fronted constituent
can be regarded as a locative expression. “It has repeatedly been argued by different authors that in
these cases the inversion construction serves as a "presentativeconstruction" with the special discourse
function of presentational focus, in which the referent of the inverted subject is introduced or
reintroduced on the (part of the) scene referred to by the preposed locative.” Д9, p.30]
A similar analysis is offered by Green (1980). However, she does not restrict herself to
locative inversion, but claims that inversion in general "may be exploited for many purposes,
ranging from facilitating fluent speech to creating a variety of rhetorical effects". [9, p.30] With
regard to rhetorical effects Green discerns two kinds of introductory function: the introductory
function proper and the connective function. The first serves to locate the postposed subject
absolutely, i.e. without regard to the previous discourse. This becomes most apparent in inversions
that appear at the beginning of a narrative, such as (1.2n):
(1.2n)
In a little white house lived two rabbits.
The second function, the connective function, roughly maps on to what above has been described as
information packaging. In both functions inversion can be regarded as a focussing device whereby
the reader's/hearer's attention is centered on the referent of the postposed NP. Both the introductory
as well as the connective function can be regarded as textual or structure-building functions.
A third function is assigned to inversions which can partly be placed somewhere in between
the other two: “the emphatic function of inversion. Its main purpose is "the resolution of some
apparent disorder in the narrative structure" (Green, 1980: 595). [9, p.31]. A different and very
comprehensive account of inversion in English is offered by Dorgeloh (1997) who provides a
functional analysis of both full inversion and subject-auxiliary inversion. Full inversions are said to
serve a twofold discourse function of establishing a viewpoint and supporting the organization of a
discourse. However, to what extent this main function (and further sub-functions) is actually
exercised depends on the type of inversion considered. Dorgeloh identifies four formally distinct
12
classes, namely deictic presentative, lexical presentative, lexical predicative, and anaphoric-cata-
phoric inversion. (see table 2)
Table 2
Function
Description
De
ictic pr
e
s
e
ntative
The functionally most restricted. The fronted elements usually are "adverbs of local or temporal
meaning which perform deictic reference". [6, p.69]
(1.2o) Now is the time to consider the future of how Britain should be governed.
This type of inversion may not support the creation of a particular viewpoint and is rather limited with
regard to discourse structuring. The fronted adverb points to a spatial or temporal location, to which the
addressee's attention is directed. Once the location expressed by the fronted element is established, the
addressee can focus on the postposed NP, which represents an object within this particular location. In
Dorgeloh's view they cannot introduce completely new topics and, thus, trigger a topic change but serve
either to introduce subtopics or to provide specifications of the main topic (1.2p):
(1.2p) Back to punch. Here is a standard recipe. [6, p.109]
Thus, deictic presentational inversions serve to shift the focus of the addressee.
Le
xica
l pr
e
se
ntative
This kind of inversion establishes a completely new ground, it is exploited to introduce "new or
out-of-focus subjects". [6, p.77] With preposed directional adverbs or prepositional phrases the
addressee is even put in the position to establish the observer's "approximate location at the
time of the reported event.
(1.2q) I opened the bedroom door, and outwalked the cat.
For the reader, this creates an effect of being part of the scene, i.e. being utside of or inside the
bedroom himself.
Function of topic change. It occurs in "genres that are not particularly prone to the special
procedural usage" [6, p.111], i.e. genres where locations are no physical realities but "internal
relations merely claimed to exist among discourse entities" [6, p.112], as in (1.2r):
(1.2r) Several hundred thousand people have left the country to stay with friends or relations
working abroad. On thetop ofthis are thousands who hadfledthedraft, the families of 36,000 Yugoslav
army officers being moved from Croatia and Slovenia, [...]. [6, p.112]
Apart from inducing a topic change from the people that have left the country to those who
have fled the draft, the inversion in (1.2r) also contributes to the structure of the text "by
expressing more or less complex relations among topics and managing the reader's attention
accordingly"; lexical presentative inversions thus also serve "structure-building" [6, p.112]
purposes.
Le
xica
l pr
e
dica
ti
ve
Also supports topic-change as well as structure-building purposes. However, the preposed constituent in
this kind of inversion has a more complex function: “The marked focus which these constituents carry
no longer singles out a location from a set of possible location, but, rather, it identifies a property which
is particularly attributable to the discourse entity that follows as subject.” Д8, p.82]
Lexical predicative inversions thus not only initiate a topic change but also mark a topic contrast.
(1.2s) These are shocking figures, but evenmoreshockingisthefactthatatleasthalfofthepeoplebehindthesecrimes
willgoundetected.
The NP ‘shockingfigures’ in the first clause of (1.2s) evokes a set of things that are potentially shocking. In
addition, marking an entity as particularly salient with regard to a certain property implies a point of
view, an evaluating authority, as it were. The evaluation of the postposed NP is thus usually made from
the viewpoint of the speaker who remains "offstage" and, accordingly, the new topic is introduced
subjectively and not objectively. This kind of inversion, then, is particularly well-suited to express
subjectivity without overt intervention.
13
Ana
phoric
/
c
a
taphor
ic
Anaphoric and cataphoric adverbs merely form a link to the point of the discourse in which they occur.
Hence they do not have any potential of creating a new location or ground on the basis of which an
entity could be introduced. Similar to deictic presentative inversions, they can therefore not introduce a
new topic or trigger a topic change: "Topic construal in these cases is at most an aside [...], a mere
coordination [...], or some kind of summary [...]". [6, p.115]
(1.2t) Czech and Polish musicology have fairly long traditions and very high standards, as indeed
has Soviet musicology, [...]. (Dorgeloh 1997:115)
Dorgeloh, as should have become clear from the discussion above, does not refute previous
analyses but rather elaborates previous observations by describing them against a larger discourse
context. In addition to her predecessors she identifies that inverted constructions may be exploited
as powerful tools in structuring a text, the author may be regarded as the "architect [...] of discourse
structure" [6, p.188], that inversions may also contribute to creating a viewpoint effect, which either
helps to involve the reader by making him part of the scene that or may serve as a convenient
means to implicitly introduce a subjective viewpoint to the reader.
The last approach to be discussed, Chen (2003), attempts to explain inversions within the
framework of cognitive linguistics. The attempt will be explored in the last chapter of this paper.
1.3. PROBLEMS
As a marked construction, inversion has been known to display a number of idiosyncrasies.
We discuss these features briefly; my purpose is only to present them as problems to be addressed.
RОsОarМhОrs’ solutТons to thОsО problОms arО quТtО НТППОrОnt.
The ПТrst ПОaturО oП ТnvОrsТon, аhТМh Rong ChОn Тn hТs book “EnglТsh InvОrsТon” (2003)
calls the polarity constraint, is that inversion does not allow negation of the verb. While both the
preverbal and postverbal constituents of an inversion can be in the negative form, the verb cannot.
(1.3a)
*On my left was not Tom Lopez.
The second feature of inversion has to do with the transitivity of verbs, which can also be
called the transitivity constraint. It is uncontroversial that simple-tense transitive verbs cannot occur
in inversion: (1.3b) *Through the revolving door pushed Tom Lopez Mary Davis. But transitive
verbs can occur quite freely in inversion when they are in the participial form, as can be seen in
(1.3c-d).
(1.3c)
Pushing Mary Davis through the revolving door was Tom Lopez.
(1.3d)
Pushed through the revolving door by Tom Lopez was Mary Davis.
Third, there is also what Rong Chen calls embeddedness constraint. This problem has
generated a long-standing debate in the literature. Earlier works on inversion, particularly those in
14
the generative tradition, view embedded inversion as ungrammatical, but others, such as Birner
(1996), argue otherwise. Example (1.3e) is from Birner:
(1.3e)
I Нon’t bОlТОvО thО report that in the garden stands a unicorn.
The fourth peculiarity of inversion concerns the auxiliary system of the inverted verb, which
can be referred to as the auxiliary constraint. The question is whether the inverted verb can take
complex auxiliaries, such as those (1.3f-h):
(1.3f)
On my left has been Lopez.
(1.3g)
On my left has been placed a unicorn-like doll.
(1.3h)
*On my left could have sat Lopez.
Some researchers, such as Emonds (1976) and Coopmans (1989), would seem these
sentences unacceptable. Others, such as Dorgeloh (1997), note the problem but do not offer
explanations for it. Most researchers, however, have chosen to ignore the problem altogether.
All these issues are syntactic. But if one devises a syntactic analysis that addresses all these
issues, one will have solved only part of the problem. The puzzle of inversion is multidimensional.
It is semantic, phonological, pragmatic as well as syntactic. [15]
15
Chapter II. INVERSION: FOCUS ON THE WEIGHT OF THE SENTENCE
As can be seen from the first chapter, the influence of syntactic complexity as the aspect in
the study of inversion is absent in previous research. To my knowledge, this aspect has mostly been
ignored in the research on inverted constructions, the only exception being Hartvigson and
Jakobsen (1974) with their distinction o notional and formal weight (see section 1.2), a very
sketchy treatment can be found in Birner (1996) and Chen (2003). To what extent syntactic
complexity contributes to the reordering in inverted construction, therefore, is a question that merits
attention.
In any clause, elements are frequently of different size and complexity, or weight. For
instance, a noun phrase realizing the subject or object clause element may be a single pronoun or a
complex structure with pre- and postmodifiers, the latter containing embedded clauses. There is a
preferred distribution of elements in the clause in accordance with their weight called the principle
of end-weight: the tendency for long and complex elements to be placed towards the end of a
clause. This eases comprehension by the receiver, who does not then have the burden of retaining
complex information from earlier in a clause in short-term memory while processing the remainder.
Since heavy elements typically also carry a substantial new information load, the information
principle and the principle of end-weight often reinforce one another.
The organization of the clause is not just a matter of end-weight, however. We sometimes
find very heavy elements at the beginning of the clause as well. By making appropriate use of both
of the most prominent points in the clause, i.e., the beginning and the end, the speaker/writer can at
the same time vary the focus and emphasis of the message and produce structures with a balance of
weight at the ends.
Of all the types of inversion used by modern writers, there is perhaps not one that could not
be shown to exist in older English. Ordinary modern usage, however, has retained those forms only
in which ancient authority combines with practical convenience; and not all of those. To set aside
the verdict of time in this respect is to be archaic. Before using inversion, therefore, the novice
should ask himself two questions: is there any solid, practical reason (ornamental reasons will not
do) for tampering with the normal order of subject and verb? and does the inversion sound natural?
Throughout this section it must be borne in mind that in all questions of right and wrong
inversion the final appeal is not to history, but to the reader's perception: what sounds right to most
modern ears is right for modern purposes. When, under balance inversion, we speak of a true and a
false principle, we do not mean to imply that the 'true' principle was, historically, the origin of this
kind of inversion, or that the 'false' is a mistaken analogy from it: all that is meant is that if we
16
examine a collection of instances, those that sound natural will prove to be based upon the 'true'
principle, and those that do not on the 'false'.
2.1.
BALANCE INVERSION
The following are familiar and legitimate types:
a. First an our list stands the question of local option.
b. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
c. To this cause may be attributed...
d. Among the guests were A, B, C,...Z.
We give the name of 'balance' to this kind of inversion because, although the writer, in
inverting the sentence, may not be distinctly conscious of rectifying its balance, the fact that it was
ill-balanced before is the true cause of inversion. It is a mistake to say that the words placed first in
the above examples are so placed for the sake of emphasis; that is a very common impression, and
is responsible for many unlawful inversions. It is not emphasis that is given to these words, it is
protection; they are placed there to protect them from being virtually annihilated, as they would
have been if left at the end. Look at the last of our examples: how can we call the words 'Among the
guests were' emphatic, or say that they were placed there for emphasis? They are essential words,
they show the connection, nor could the sentence be a sentence without them; but they are as
unemphatic as words could well be.—Why, then (it may be asked), are they put at the beginning? is
not this an emphatic position? and does not any unusual position give emphasis?—No: it gives not
emphasis but prominence, which is another thing.
Put the sentence back into its original form, and we shall see why inversion was desirable.
'A, B, C, D, E, F...Z were among the guests.' Observe how miserably the sentence tails off; it has no
balance. By inverting it, we introduce several improvements. First, we give prominence to the
unemphatic predicate, and enable it to discharge its humble office, that of a sign-post, indicating the
connection with what has gone before. Secondly, by giving prominence to the predicate, we give
balance to the sentence, which before was top-heavy. Thirdly, we give prominence to the subject,
by placing it in an unusual position.
Next take the 'local option' sentence. Are the words 'First on our list' emphatic? Not if the
inverter knows his business. How did it run originally? 'The question of local option stands first on
our list.' These words might be meant to tell us either of two things: what stood first on the list, or
where local option stood. If the inversion is right, they are meant to tell us what stood first. If the
other had been meant, then 'First on the list' would have been emphatic, and the writer would have
left it in its place; but as it is not emphatic, and the other words are, the sentence is top-heavy; he
17
therefore inverts it, thus balancing the sentence, and placing the unemphatic words in a prominent
position, where they continue to be unemphatic, but are sure to be noticed. In spoken language, the
relative importance of the different parts of a sentence can be indicated merely by the inflexion of
the voice; but the balance of the sentence is best maintained, even then, by means of inversion. It is
the same with the other examples. If we restore the St. Matthew quotation to the uninverted form,
again we have an answer to either of two questions: What is the basis of the law? and What is the
importance of these two commandments? Obviously it is meant as an answer to the latter, and
therefore the words that convey that answer are the emphatic words; the others are not emphatic,
but merely essential to the connection; the general importance of the 'two commandments', as
forming the subject-matter of the whole context, does not in the slightest degree affect their relation
to the other words in this particular sentence.
It follows from what has been said that true balance inversion is employed not for the sake
of impressiveness, but with the purely negative object of avoiding a bad balance. The data required
for its justification are (i) An emphatic subject, carrying in itself the point of the sentence. (ii)
Unemphatic 'sign-post' words, essential to the connection, standing originally at the end of the
sentence, and there felt to be inadequately placed. The results of the inversion must be (iii) that the
sign-post stands at the beginning, and (iv) that the subject stands absolutely at the end.
When these four conditions are fulfilled, the inversion, far from being objectionable, may
tend greatly to vigor and lucidity. It is liable, of course, to be overdone, but there are several ways
of avoiding that: sometimes it is possible to place the sign-post at the beginning without inversion;
or the uninverted sentence may be reconstructed, so that the subject no longer carries the emphasis;
and, as often as not, a sentence of which the accentuation is theoretically doubtful may in practice
be left to the reader's discernment.
One occasional limitation remains to be mentioned, before we proceed to instances. It
applies to those sentences only that have a compound verb: if the compound verb cannot be
represented simply by its auxiliary component, the inversion may have to be abandoned, on account
of the clumsiness of compound verbs in the middle of an inverted sentence; for to carry the other
component to the end would be to violate our fourth rule. Take the type sentence 'To these causes
may be attributed...', and first let the subject be 'our disasters'. The clumsiness of the verb is then
distinctly felt; and 'To these causes may our disasters be attributed' is ugly enough to show the
importance of the rule it violates. But next let the subject be 'every one of the disasters that have
come upon us'. This time the inversion is satisfactory; whence we conclude that if the verb is
compound, the subject must be long as well as emphatic, or the inversion will not do.
18
e. On the answer to this question depends entirely every decision concerning the goodness
or badness of conduct.—Spencer.
f. Just as, after contact, some molecules of a mass of food are absorbed by the part
touched, and excite the act of apprehension, so are absorbed such of its molecules as,
spreading through the water, reach the organism.—Spencer.
Variants a and f are both formed on the right principle, but the f suffers from the
awkwardness of the auxiliary.
g. Still more when considered in the concrete than when considered in the abstract do the
views of Hobbes and his disciples prove to be inconsistent.—Spencer.
Here we have neither the data that justify balance inversion, nor the results that should follow from
it. It is due to the false principle of 'emphasis' dealt with below in d. and reads as awkwardly as
such inversions usually read. The sentence is, no doubt, cumbrous in the uninverted form; but it
wants reconstruction, not inversion.
h. Much deeper down than the history of the human race must we go to find the beginnings
of these connections.—Spencer.
Wrong again, for the same reasons, but not with the same excuse; for the original form is
unobjectionable. The emphasis is not on the problem (to find...), but on the clue to it (much deeper
down), which, being emphatic, can maintain its position at the end of the sentence. The compound
verb is only a secondary objection: we do not mend matters much by substituting lie for must we go
to find.
i. You say he is selfish. Well, so is every one.
j. You say he is selfish. Well, so is every one selfish.
So is every one is a correct inversion: so is too weak to stand at the end, and at the beginning
it is a good enough sign-post to tell us that selfishness is going to be defended. But in j so is every
one selfish is wrong: for if selfish is repeated at all, it is repeated with rhetorical effect, and is strong
enough to take care of itself. Our second rule is thus violated; and so is our fourth—the subject does
not come at the end.
k. All three methods had their charm. So may have Mr. Yeats's notion of...—Times.
This time, the compound verb is fatal. 'So, perhaps, has...' would do.
l. The arrival of the Hartmanns created no little excitement in the Falconet family, both
among the sons and the daughters. Especially was there no lack of speculation as to the
character and appearance of Miss Hartmann.—Beaconsfield.
Right or wrong in principle, this does not read comfortably; but that may seem to be due to
the cumbrous phrase 'was there no lack of', which for practical purposes is a compound verb. That
difficulty we can remove without disturbing the accentuation of the sentence: 'Especially numerous
19
were the speculations as to the character of Miss Hartmann'. These resembles in form our old type
‘Among thО guОsts аОrО...’, but аТth thО Тmportant НТППОrОnМО that ‘ОspОМТallв numОrous’ Тs
emphatic, and can therefore stand at the end. The inversion is rather explained than justified by the
still stronger emphasis on 'Miss Hartmann'. Sentences in which both subject and predicate are
independently emphatic should be avoided, quite apart from the question of inversion: italics are
more or less necessary to secure the inferior emphasis, and italics are a confession of weakness.
m. Somewhat lightened was the provincial panic by this proof that the murderer had not
condescended to sneak into the country, or to abandon for a moment, under any motion
of caution or fear, the great metropolitan castra stativa of gigantic crime seated for ever
on the Thames.—De Quincey (the italics are his).
Not a happy attempt. We notice, for one thing, that the subject does not come at the end; the
inversion is not complete. Let us complete it. To do so, we must convey our huge sign-post to the
beginning: 'By this proof ... Thames, was somewhat lightened the provincial panic.' Worse than
ever; is the compound verb to blame? Remove it, and see: 'In consequence of this proof ... Thames,
subsided in some degree the provincial panic'. This is not much better. There is another and a worse
flaw: condition number one is not satisfied; we want 'an emphatic subject that carries in itself the
point of the sentence'. Now we must not assume that because 'provincial' is italicized, therefore the
subject (however emphatic) carries in itself the point of the sentence. What is that point? what
imaginary question does the sentence answer? Can it be meant to answer the question 'What
limitations were there upon the comfort derived from the intelligence that the murderer was still in
London?'? No; that question could not be asked; we have not yet been told that any comfort at all
was derived. The question it answers is 'What effect did this intelligence produce upon the general
panic?'. This question can be asked; for the reader evidently knows that a panic had prevailed, and
that the intelligence had come. If, then, we are to use balance inversion, we must so reconstruct the
sentence that the words containing the essential answer to this question become the subject; we
must change 'somewhat lightened' into 'some alleviation'. 'From this proof ... Thames, resulted some
alleviation of the provincial panic.' That is the best that inversion will do for us; it is not quite
satisfactory, and the reason is that the sentence is made to do too much. When the essential point is
subject to an emphatic limitation (an unemphatic one like 'somewhat' does not matter), the
limitation ought to be conveyed in a separate sentence; otherwise the sentence is overworked, and
either shirks its work, with the result of obscurity, or protests by means of italics. We ought
therefore to have: 'From ... resulted some alleviation of the general panic; this, however, was
confined to the provinces'. But, except for this incidental fault, the sentence can be mended without
inversion: 'By this proof ... Thames, the provincial panic was somewhat lightened'.
20
2.2. INVERSION IN RELATIVE CLAUSES
In clauses introduced by as, than, or a relative (pronoun or adverb), we have only a special case
of balance inversion. They differ from the instances considered above in this important respect that
their relation to the preceding words is no longer paratactic, but syntactic, with the result that the
sign-post indicating this relation is necessarily placed at the beginning. This will be seen from a
comparison of the paratactic and syntactic forms in the following pairs of examples:
a. He was quick-tempered: so are most Irishmen. (Paratactic.)
b. He was quick-tempered, as are most Irishmen. (Syntactic.)
c. Several difficulties now arose: among them was...
d. Several difficulties now arose, among which was...
Now in each of these sentences there are the same inducements to inversion in the syntactic
form as in the paratactic; and added to these is the necessity for placing the sign-post at the
beginning. We might expect, therefore, that inversion of syntactic clauses would be particularly
common. But (i) We have already seen that inversion does not necessarily follow from the fact that
the sign-post is placed at the beginning. And (ii) The verb in as and than clauses will probably,
from the nature of the case, be the same as in the preceding clause. If it is in the same mood and
tense, it can usually be omitted, unless effective repetition is required, in which case it will go to the
end: a change of mood or tense, on the other hand, will often be marked by an auxiliary (itself
perhaps compound), which again will usually preclude inversion.
The result is this:
Relative clauses, uninfluenced by the position of the sign-post, remain subject to precisely
the same conditions as the corresponding paratactic sentences. Thus 'Among whom were...'
is right, just as 'Among the guests were...' was right; 'Among which would I mention...' is of
course impossible, because the subject does not carry the point; and 'To which may be
attributed...' is right or wrong, according as the subject is or is not long enough to balance
the compound verb.
Inversion of an as or than clause, having become unusual for the reason mentioned above, is
almost certain to look either archaic or clumsy; clumsy when the reason for it is apparent,
archaic when it is not. The practical rule is this: if you cannot omit the verb, put it at the
end; and if you can neither omit it nor put it at the end, reconstruct the sentence.
e. The German government was as anxious to upset M. Delcassé as have been his bitterest
opponents in France.—Times.
The verb is preserved to avoid ambiguity. But it should go to the end, especially as it is compound.
21
Chapter III. TYPES OF INVERSION: FOCUS ON GRAMMATICAL PRINCIPLES OF WORD-
ORDER
In previous chapters we have explored different opinions on inversion, analyzed general
categories and categories of particular authors; they turned out to be numerous. But the author of
this work considers it to be his duty to present the modern classical view on the classification of
inversion according to how this phenomenon is explained and taught in the British Universities and
other public institutions. ThТs sОМtТons Тs maТnlв basОН on thО matОrТals oП thО book “Longman
English Grammar of spoken and wrТttОn EnglТsh”, thТs sourМО Тs МonsТНОrОН rОspОМtПul, prОsОntТng
inversion from the point of grammatical organization of word order and not allowing
extravagancies in exploration.
In present day English, the subject generally stays before the verb-with the exception of
interrogative clauses – whether there is some other pre-verbal element or not. Nevertheless, given
the right circumstances, inversion does occur in present day English outside interrogative clauses.
There are two main types:
Subject-verb inversion or full inversion, where the subject is preceded by the entire verb
phrase
Subject-operator or partial inversion, where the subject is preceded by the operator rather
than by the main verb or a full verb phrase. As in independent interrogative clauses, the
auxiliary do is inserted, if there is no other verb that can serve as operator. The remainder of
the verb phrase follows the subject, if included.
Both types are triggered by some element other than the subject being placed in clause-
initial position. Yet the behavior of the two types is quite different, as we shall see below.
Furthermore, there is a great deal of variety in inversion patterns, some of which are obsolescent,
reflecting differences both in form and communicative effect.
In general, inversion serves several discourse functions:
cohesion and contextual fit (especially: subject-verb inversion)
placement of focus (end focus and double focus)
intensification (especially: subject-operator inversion).
Through skilful use of fronting combined with inversion, the speaker/writer can exploit the
potential of the two most prominent positions in the clause: the opening and the end. The resulting
structures adapt the clause to the context or produce some special stylistic effect (or both at the
same time).
22
3.1.
SUBJECT-VERB INVERSION
Subject-verb inversion is found most typically under the following circumstances:
The clause opens with an adverbial, especially one of place, providing the background or
setting for a situation. This adverbial often links the clause explicitly to the preceding text
through a definite noun phrase. The opening element may also be a subject predicative
linked to the preceding text.
The verb is copular and has less weight than the subject. It often expresses existence or
emergence on the scene.
The clause ends with a long and heavy subject introducing new information, often as an
indefinite noun phrase, which may be further developed in the following text.
In other words, these structures conform to the requirements of the information principle and the
end-weight principle.
The contextual fit of clauses with subject-verb inversion is such that a simple reordering of subject
and verb is generally excluded for a clause in its context:
I do her worm for her, when her teacher isn't looking. Then I draw a diagram of the worm,
cut open, beautifully labeled. After that comes the frog. The frog kicks and is more difficult
than the worm; it looks a little too much like a person swimming.
Here it is hardly possible to reorder the subject and the verb (After that the frog comes), in part
because light-weight verbs are not generally used in final position. The only possible alternative
order would be: The frog comes after that. This is less effective than the word order found in the
text, which starts with a reference to the preceding text (after that) and moves on to the new
referent (the frog), which is in its turn the starting-point of the following sentence. The order in the
text also underlines the temporal sequencing of the events narrated.
Opening place adverbial
Place descriptions with overt or implied anaphoric elements are common with subject-verb
inversion (subject-verb inversion is in bold, while the initially placed triggering elements are given
in []):
[On one long wall] hung a row of Van Gogh.
[On the horizon] is a field of view overgrown with nettles.
The distribution of information often reflects how a scene is observed. Note the following
description of the streets moving by:
This was Amsterdam Avenue, with the cross streets moving slowly by. [There] goes Eighty-
seventh. [Here] comes Eighty-eighth.
23
Here and there define a place as proximate v. distant from the point of view of the speaker and are
often found in inversion structures:
[Here’s] the bag.
[There's] the dog. Call the dog.
Locative there (as in the last example) should be distinguished from existential there, though a
comparison between the two constructions is instructive.
A special type of place element triggering subject-verb inversion is an adverbial particle
indicating direction:
Worry, worry, Alice sat worrying. [In] came Jasper, smiling jaunty, stepping like a dancer.
Billy opened his eyes, and [out] came a deep, resonant tone.
This type of structure is unusual in that the opening element does not indicate a background or
setting, but is strongly focused. It is used in dramatic narration, to emphasize a sudden change or
event.
Descriptions with place adverbials are particularly common with subject-verb inversion in
fiction and news texts, especially the type realized by a full prepositional phrase. The inversion type
with here and there is also common in conversation. The type with a fronted adverbial particle is
particularly frequent in fiction.
Opening time adverbial
The opening adverbial may also be one of time, frequently then introducing a new event:
For a moment nothing happened. [Then] came voices all shouting together.
[Then] came the turning point of the match.
Most of these adverbials imply reference back to preceding, given, information.
Other types of opening adverbials
In academic prose, where there is less scope for place description and narration, we find examples
such as the following:
Formaldehyde may be generated in various ways. [Among these] is heating a solution of
formaldehyde in a <. . .>
[With incorporation, and the increased size of the normal establishment], came changes
which revolutionized office administration.
These abstract locative examples agree broadly with the other adverbial patterns described above:
they also generally contain anaphoric links with the preceding text. However, these fronted
locatives may be quite long, so the overall weight distribution of the clause is one of balance rather
than end-weight.
Complex verb phrases
24
The verb phrase preceding the subject may be complex, provided that it is lighter than the following
subject; for example (with verb phrase in bold and subject in[]):
Bat of all would be [to get a job in Wellingham].
Among the sports will be [athletics, badminton, basketball]
Here is provided [a patchwork of attractive breeding sites, which <. . .>].
Note that the verb phrase is not split with subject-verb inversion, as is the rule with subject-operator
inversion.
Variation in type of subject
Unlike subject-operator inversion, which is syntactically obligatory with particular dements in
initial position, subject-verb inversion varies with the complexity and information value of the
subject and the verb. Compare:
a. Then the night came up in dark blue vapour from the snow.
b. Then the words came out in a rush.
c. Then came the call from Sergio Leone.
d. Then came the turning point of the match.
The regular subject-verb order is the natural choice in a and b, where the subject is a simple
definite noun phrase and the verb is accompanied by elements complementing the verbal meaning.
In contrast, inversion is just as natural in c and d, where there is a simple intransitive verb followed
by a longer and more informative subject.
Subject-verb inversion is excluded with a light-weight pronoun as subject, although ordinary
subject-verb order is often possible:
On one long wall hung a row of Van Goghs.
cf *On one long wall hung it/they.
But: 'on one long wall it/they hung.
Then came the turning point of the match.
cf: *Then came it.
But: Then it came.
Although inversion is most typically found with long and/or indefinite noun phrases in subject
position, we also find examples such as:
Watch out! [Here] comes Amanda!
And [then] came that clap of thunder.
Such inversions frequently seem to convey an element of suspense and surprise.
25
3.2.
SUBJECT-OPERATOR INVERSION
Subject-operator inversion, or partial inversion, differs from subject-verb inversion in a
number of ways:
Inversion may occur with both transitive and intransitive verbs. Especially with the former,
there is often a weighty predicate occupying end position in the clause.
The opening elements triggering subject-operator inversion are much more restricted.
Inversion is obligatory where the triggering elements are found and occurs both with light-
weight unstressed subject pronouns and with noun-headed subjects.
In addition, the effect of the two types of inversion is quite different, as illustrated below.
Negative or restrictive opening elements
Subject-operator inversion is found after opening negative or restrictive coordinators or adverbials,
such as: neither, nor, never, nowhere, on no condition, not only, hardly, no sooner, rarely, scarcely,
seldom, little, less, only. In the following examples, inversion is marked in bold and triggering
elements are marked by []:
a. A: 1 haven't got a copy of club rules.
B: [Nor] have I.
b. And she said, you know, [on no account] must he strain.
c. [Nor] was there the faintest scent of ink or the cherry gum and oak bark from which it was
made. Nothing.
d. [Not before in our history] have so many strong influences united to produce so large a
disaster.
e. Judged simply in statistical terms these were stunning. [Rarely, if ever], do we find such a
consensus across area and social class.
f. [Rarely] are all the constraints on shape, function and manufacturing clearly defined at
the commencement of the activity, [Even less] are they understood and their effect, one on
another, recognized by the designer.
Due to the prominent placement, there is an intensification of the force of the
negative/restrictive element. Note how the effect is underlined even further by other devices in
most of these examples: the expression the faintest and the following sentence fragment Nothing in
c; the use twice of intensifier so in d; the addition of if ever in e; and the parallel structures in the
two sentences in f. Subject-operator inversion after most initial negative/restrictive elements has a
rhetorical effect and is virtually restricted to writing. However, subject-operator inversion after
initial nor or neither is found in conversation as well as in the written registers. Note also the
colloquial expression no way:
26
Oh [no way] do I want to take that.
And if the case went to trial, there wasn't a damn thing Katheryn could do to stop them. And
[no way] could she get Sarah to understand that.
No way expresses strong negation and is obligatorily placed in initial position.
Order and negative scope
Inversion is found only if the negative scope affects the whole of the clause. Thus there is no
inversion in:
g. No doubt he will issue his instructions.
h. Not surprisingly, most studies have concerned themselves with ill effect, notably that of
emotional stress.
i. Not many years ago, it seemed that almost all readability research and almost all research
in linguistics confined itself to the analysis of units no larger than a sentence.
In g and h the negation is part of the stance adverbial only, while in i it is part of the modification of
the time adverbial. The main statements are thus expressed in positive terms (e.g. he will issue . . .).
Occasionally, we find differences in ordering - and in some cases meaning - with the same or
similar forms. Compare:
Forms with normal word order:
j. [In no time at all] the hotels would be jammed to the doors.
k. I could have gone there. [Only] I didn't. I didn't care.
l. In the winter, sometimes, [rarely], you can hear the thunder of a siren but it is another
county.
Forms triggering inversion:
m. [At no time] did he indicate he couldn't cope.
n. [Only then] did he feel better.
o. [Rarely] can two sets of forwards have covered so much ground.
In no time in j clearly does not affect the positive nature of the statement we still conclude that the
hotels would be jammed to the doors, while in m the implication is he did not ever indicate that he
couldn't cope. Example k illustrates the use of initial only without inversion in the sense of 'but' or
'except', rather than in its customary restrictive adverb use as in n. Finally, l illustrates the use of
rarely meaning 'occasionally, sometimes' rather than 'not very often' (note the following comma,
marking a looser connection with the clause). In most examples, however, initial rarely does trigger
inversion.
Degree expressions with so and such
27
There is subject-operator inversion after opening elements consisting of the degree adverb so
followed by an adjective or adverb:
He refused to stir. [So greatly] had he suffered, and [so far gone] was he, that the blows did
not hurt much.
[So badly] was he affected that he had to be taught to speak again.
The pattern has a degree expression in initial position, usually accompanied by a following
comparative complement clause. The effect of the pattern is a further intensification of the degree
expression.
Inversion after the linking forms so, nor, and neither
Inversion can occur after initial so when it is used as a pro-form pointing back to the predicate of a
preceding dame:
p. A: We used to watch that on T.V.
B: Yes, [so] did I.
q. A: French oral's a doddle.
B: Is it?
A: Yeah, [so] is German reading.
This inversion pattern usually includes no part of the verb phrase other than the inverted operator.
The pattern expresses semantic parallelism and could be paraphrased with subject-verb order plus
additive too, e.g. 1 did too in p.
This use of so is clearly different from initial so in degree expressions. The initial so in these
examples stands for given information, and so has a cohesive effect, it is also in initial position, and
so emphasizes the parallelism between the clauses. The subject is the main new communicative
point of the clause and is placed in the end focus position after the verb. The result is a structure
with double focus.
Clauses with the initial pro-form so are closely related to structures with initial nor and neither,
which express parallelism with respect to a preceding negative clause:
r. She hadn't known much about life, [nor] had he.
s. The generalization's truth, if it is true, is not affected by how we count things in question,
and [neither] is its falsehood if it is fate.
The meaning could be paraphrased with subject-verb order plus either, e.g. . . . and he hadn't either
in r. Again the inversion pattern produces both a cohesive link and a double focus which
emphasizes the parallelism.
Unlike no and neither, so is sometimes found with subject-verb order:
t. Aye, he's a bastard, [so] he is.
u. Have we a file? Yes [so] we have.
28
In these instances the verb is in end focus rather than the subject. The effect is not of adding a
proposition parallel to that which has gone before.
Special cases of inversion in independent clauses
Some uses of inversion are highly restricted and usually confined to more or less fixed collocations.
Types A and B described below are remnants of earlier uses and carry archaic literary overtones.
(A) Formulaic clauses with subjunctive verb forms
The combination of the inflectionless subjunctive and inversion gives the highlighted expressions
below an archaic and solemn ring:
Be it proclaimed in all the schools Plato was right!
If you want to throw your life away, so be it, it is your life, not mine.
(B) Clauses opening with the auxiliary may
The auxiliary may is used in a similar manner to express a strong wish. This represents a more
productive pattern:
May it be pointed out that the teacher should always try to extend the girls helping them to
achieve more and more.
May God forgive you your blasphemy, Pilot. Yes. May he forgive you and open your eyes.
Inversion in dependent clauses
Although inversion is basically a main clause phenomenon, we do find it in dependent clauses. In
most cases, this kind of inversion is closely related to the types discussed above. With the exception
of F below which is a colloquial conversational choice; these patterns are restricted to formal
writing.
(A) Subject-verb inversion with opening adverbials
The formal conditions and the effect of the inversions illustrated below clearly parallel subject-verb
inversion in main clauses following place adverbials and adverbial particles:
She pointed to an impressive but imitation oak desk [at which] sat a prissy, tiny,
bespectacled individual.
In the centre of the green was a pond, beside it was a wooden seat [on which]sat two men
talking.
(B) Subject-operator inversion with opening negatives/restrictives
Subject-operator inversion can penetrate into dependent clauses under the same circumstances and
with the same effect as in main clauses:
Mr Teague said that [at no time] was Paul Jones ever hit with a cane or whip, [at no time]
was he tied upside down and hit.
Introspection suggests that [only rarely] do we consciously ponder the pronunciations of
words.
29
(C) Clauses introduced by as and than
Inversion involving an operator on its own is found in formal writing in comparative clauses
introduced by as and than, provided that the subject is heavier than the verb. In addition, inversion
also occurs in other as-clauses:
Comparative clauses:
a) Independent agencies are in a better position to offer personal service than are those tied to
big chains, believes managing director Daphne Armstrong.
b) The liquid products are fractionally distilled, and refined in the same way as are the
petroleum fractions.
Other as-clauses:
c) They chatted about Hollywood, and Charlotte was fascinated, as were the other guests.
d) The contraceptive cap can also spark the syndrome, as can a wound infection.
e) It would be agreeable to pass it by, as have many inquiries into determinism pertaining to
decisions and actions.
f) At lean it is only two kisses and not three, as is the Russian custom.
Clauses of this latter kind (adverbials of manner) are often reminiscent of inversion with the pro-
form so, which may account for the inversion. We might closely paraphrase 3 with: . . . (as)
Charlotte was fascinated, so were the other guests. In f) the pattern is similar to a non-restrictive
relative clause introduced by which: . . ., which is the Russian custom.
(D) Hypothetical conditional clauses
In formal writing we find conditional clauses marked by inversion rather than by a subordinator.
This is restricted to clauses introduced by had, should, and subjunctive were:
'I would be mare hopeful," Sandy said, 'were it not for the problem of your testimony."
Were it running mom slowly, all geologic activity would have proceeded at a slower pace.
He would have accepted only the usual expenses had he undertaken this summer’s tour
marking the South African Rugby Board's centenary.
Should either of these situations occur, wrong control actions may be taken and a potential
accident sequence initiated.
In all of these cases, it is possible to use a paraphrase with if which is the more common option. For
example, we could re-word the first sentence above as follows (with a subjunctive or an indicative
verb form): . . . if it we/was not for the problem of your testimony.
(E) Alternative and universal conditional clauses with subjunctive verbs
In the examples below, the dependent clauses can be paraphrased by whether it/he/they be/is/are
introducing a clause providing two alternative possible conditions:
30
When the going gets tough, it's these people who read best - be it at a natural disaster,
accident or sudden emergency.
His passion is really for the others he writes about, be they as famous as Brecht or as
obscure as his landlady.
Examples such as the following are paraphrasable with an uninverted whatever clause, expressing a
universal condition:
La Bruyere strikes one as a naturally timid man who has somewhat desperately made up his
mind to utter his whole self: come what may.
These patterns of inversion are remnants of constructions which at one time were more widespread.
They are highly restricted and carry a literary overtone.
(F) Dependent interrogative clauses with inversion
Dependent interrogative clauses are normally introduced by a wh-word, and regularly have ordinary
subject-verb order. A more informal alternative, without a connecting link, is found in colloquial
English:
And she said would we like these shirts.
And then he said try it again and she rang and she asked, she said had the cheques come.
This pattern represents a compromise between direct and indirect speech. It preserves the subject-
operator inversion of the independent interrogative clause, but pronouns have been adjusted and
verb forms back shifted to the report in situation. For example, compare in the last example the
direct speech form: Will you help out? Note that the examples with said require a change of
reporting verb if they are rephrased as ordinary indirect questions:
Direct speech: She said, "Can/Could you turf the fawn for me?"
Semi-direct: She said could we turf the lawn for her.
Indirect speech: She asked whether we could turf the lawn for her.
The compromise form expresses a more direct report than ordinary dependent interrogative clauses.
31
Chapter IV. INVERSION AS GROUND-BEFORE-FIGURE ISTANTIATION
The foregoing review of research on inversion suggests the following. First, the various
syntactic approaches, which have been predominantly generative in orientation, have yielded little
success in their efforts to account for the syntactic properties of inversion, let alone other aspects of
inversion, particularly its semantic and pragmatic properties. Second, the various functional
accounts have not provided a unified explanation for the full array of properties of inversion,
although each of these accounts has offered its own insight on the construction.
What is needed, then, is a unified account capable of explaining inversion at the levels of
semantics, phonology, syntax, as well as pragmatics. Rong ChОn prОsОnts, basОН on hТs аorНs, “thО
model that is able to include all these insights in a unified theoretical framework. GbF (Ground-
before-Figure) cognitive model, based firmly on insights from cognitive linguistics, subsumes
previous functional and semantic accounts of inversion, provides explanations for a host of its
struМtural ПОaturОs, anН ОбplaТns Тts phonologТМal МharaМtОrТstТМs anН НТsМoursО ПunМtТons”. Д15, p.32]
ThТs moНОl Тs ПormulatОН as Пolloаs: “ThОrО arО tТmОs аhОn a spОakОr аants hОr hОarer to
locate and/or pay attention to an entity (figure) in a location (ground), but the hearer does not know
the existence of that figure in the ground. So the speaker presents the ground first by anchoring it
with a landmark that is established most often in the previous linguistic context and sometimes in
the discourse context. This order of figure/ground presentation invites the hearer to search the
grounН Тn orНОr to loМatО anН/or ПoМus on thО ПТgurО” [15, p.48]. Consider the example below:
(4a)
The huge engines were built into the wings. Below tlie wings was a pairof stubbysea-
wings,winchservedtostabilizetheaircraftwhenitwasinthewater. [15, p.60]
Example (4a) is part of a description of a particular kind of aircraft. The speaker wants to introduce
“a pair of stubby sea-wings” into the reader's image of the aircraft; the sea-wings, therefore, are the
figure. However, the reader needs "to be able to put different parts of the aircraft together, into a
whole, as she reads along" [15, p.61]: the writer first has to introduce a ground against which the
figure can stand out; or, in other words: the reader has to be told where on the aircraft the sea-wings
should be located. Accordingly, "the writer provides the ground ‘Below the wings’, before the figure
‘a pairofstubbysea-wings’so that the reader can mentally search the former in order to locate the latter"
[15, p.60]. As can be seen in the example, this ground is anchored in the previous discourse by a
landmark, namely ‘the wings’. This landmark, since its position is known to the reader, serves as a
point of reference for the ground, which thus can be established. In a last step, the reader can then
locate the figure astubbypairofsea-wings.
ThО МoНТng ‘ПТgurО/grounН’ Мan bО prОsОntОН at thО lОvОl oП аorН-order. The subject of a
32
sentence is assumed to code the figure and predicative adjectives and adverbials are assumed to
code the ground. So the choice between an inversion and its uninverted counterpart is essentially a
choice between two possible orders of figure/ground presentation: in an uninverted sentence, the
figure is presented before the ground whereas in inversion, the ground is presented before the
figure. The vital part of this argument, then, is to show why English speakers need to present a
ground before a figure.
In the following, Chen introduces different types of inversions as particular kinds of
instantiations of the GbF model described above. The prototypical type of inversion, he claims, is
the LOC-BE type, consisting of a locative element which is followed by a form of BE and the
subject, as exemplified below:
(4b)
On my left was Tom Lopez.
This prototype may be extended to two major variations (see 100-102 for details and minor
subtypes): one extension concerns the verbal part of the inversion, which may also be realized as a
verb of motion. In these cases the ground denotes a path along which the figure is moving. This
inversion type is termed the PATH-Vm inversion and exemplified in (4c):
(4c)
Through the revolving door swept Tom Lopez. [15, p.57]
A further extension of the prototype concerns the ground only: the spatiality of the preposed
constituent in the prototype is replaced by nonspatiality, resulting in the NSPAT-BE type of
inversion:
(4d)
But far more damaging has been the candidate's unwillingness… [15, p.58]
Chen then sets out to show that the three types of inversion above are closely connected to
particular types of discourse, namely description, narration and exposition. While the first type of
discourse answers the question 'what was there?', the second gives an answer to 'what happened?'.
Both refer to bodily experience. The exposition type relates to mental experience and is mainly
concerned with reasoning, interpreting and influencing. Interestingly, the three inversion types
identified above are not evenly distributed across these three types of discourse, but pattern as is
shown in table 3:Table3
I
NVERSION TYPE
D
ISCOURSE TYPE
LOC-BE
D
ESCRIPTION
PATH-Vm
N
ARRATION
NSPAT-BE
E
XPOSITION
The locative type of inversion is most frequent in descriptional texts, since these are primarily
33
spatial and I.OC BE "has a strong spatial orientation". [15, p.255] In narration this type is used "to
present a long-awaited figure because of the inherent stativity in the semantics of its verb". [15,
p.255] In contrast, the PATH-Vm type is used in this discourse type since a movement along a path
is dynamic and thereby evokes temporal sequence, which "is the key to narrative discourse". [15,
p.255] The last inversion type, NSPAT BE, is exclusive to exposition. Its main use is to "connect
different discourse entities more effectively". [15, p.249] This effect can be explained in analogy to
the LOC-BE type: similar to the locative type, which facilitates the location of a particular item in
the physical space evoked by a description discourse, the non-locative type eases the introduction
of an item into a space of ideas and arguments. [9]
I fixed a sТnglО МhaptОr Тn mв аork Пor Rong ChОn’s opТnТon on ТnvОrsion as I think his
point of view is a sort of revolution in this field of linguistics. He determines that his idea is
objective and it is quite true as his GbF monel can explain all problems of inversion enumerated in
section 1.3. He presented a number of syntactic features of inversion and pointed out that most
previous studies have not attempted to account for these features. The few explanations that have
been offered seem largely unsatisfactory. In his book Chen provides accounts for these
idiosyncrasies of inversion based on the proposed GbF model: for the polarity, the transitivity, the
auxiliary constraint and the weight constraint. Chen argues that all these features are in line with the
spirit of GbF model. Unfortunately, due to the limited volume of this work, we have no opportunity
to analyze this idea in detail, but only on the surface.
34
CONCLUSION
The analysis of inversion fixed a lot of features of inversion. It showed that inversion can
fulfill diverse functions: emphatic (Cooper), information packaging (Hartvigson/Jakobsen, Green,
Penhallurick, Rochemont, Birner), topic-(re)introducing function (Bolinger, Hetzon, Bresnan),
function of viewpoit effect (Drubig, Dorgeloh), structure-building function (Dorgeloh) and ground-
before-figure function (Chen). It is true that all these features were explored gradually, beginning
with generative grammar and finishing with cognitive grammar; the exploration is still going on.
Having made the research, a group of problems of inversion was defined: polarity problem,
transitivity problem, complex-auxiliary problem, embeddedness problem, weight problem. Only
few of them were explained by previous researches, except the explanation of Rong Chen, who
made it in manner of cognitive grammar.
This study presents the development of historical linguistic view on inversion, its problems,
reveals the complex nature of inversion. The work explains in detail types and functions of modern
English inversion, especially concerned by the tradition of grammar, the rules of using it in
different contexts. The author of this research thinks that all the goals determined at the beginning
of the work have been successfully achieved.
35
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.
я .. И
ы
. – ., 1966. – 256 .
2. И
И..,
. .,
..
я
я ы :
. - .: ы
я
, 1981. - 285 .
3. К
К.., И
..
я
яы . – К
:
, 2003. – 672 .
4. Birner, Betty. The Discourse Function of Inversion in English. – New York: Garland, 1996.
5. Blokh M.Y. A course in theoretical English grammar. – .: ы
я
, 2003 – c. 329-
360
6. Dorgeloh, Heidrun. Inversion in Modern English: Form and Function. – Amsterdam, 1997
7. Emonds, J. ATransformational Approach to English Syntax: Root, Structure-Preserving and
Local Transformations. Academic Press, New York. – 1976.
8. Fowler H.W. ThО KТng’s EnglТsh, 2nН ОН. - 1908: http://www.bartleby.com/116/303.html
9. Kreyer, Rolf. Inversion in Modern Written English: Syntactic Complexity, Information Status
and the Creative Writer. – Tubingen: Gunter Nurr, 2006. – 261p.
10. Kukharenko V. A book of Practice in Stylistics. – ., 1986 – p. 76
11. List
of
18
Types
of
Subject/Verb
Inversion:
www.testmagic.com/
grammar/explanations/inversion.htm
12. Longman grammar of spoken and written English / Douglas Biber, Stig Johansson, Ceof key
Leech, Susan Conrad, Edward Finegan. – Edinburg, 1999. – p. 896-935
13. Peter W. Culicover and Robert D. Levine. Stylistic inversion in English: a reconsideration. //
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory –Netherlands, 2001. - № 19. – p. 283-310
14. Rochemont, Michael S. Focus in Generative Grammar. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins. – 1986.
15. Rong, Chen. English Inversion: A Ground-Before-Figure Construction. – Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter, 2003.
16. Sidney Greenbaum & Gerald Nelson. An introduction to English Grammar, 2nd ed. – London,
2002. – p. 22-25.
17. Wikipedia. The free encyclopedia. Inversion (linguistics):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inversion_(linguistics)
Информация о работе Inversions in Modern English