Syntax and semantics of verbals in English free essay sample

Contentss: I. Introduction 1.1. General features of the work 1.2. Definition of the term # 171 ; Verbals # 187 ; II. Main Part Chapter 1 Grammatical overview of English verbals 2.1.1. General features of English verbals 2.1.2. The Infinitive 2.1.3. General features of Participles 2.1.4. The Gerund Chapter 2 Syntax and Semantics of English Verbals 2.2.1. The maps of the Infinitive in the sentence 2.2.2. Infinitive buildings 2.2.3. Syntax and semantics of participials 2.2.4 Predicative buildings with the participials 2.2.5. Syntactic function of the Gerund 2.2.6. Constructions with the Gerund 2.2.7. Control exercises on verbals utilizing III. Decision IV. Bibliography I. Introduction 1.1 General features of the work The subject of my making work sounds as following: # 8220 ; Syntax and Semantics of Verbals in English # 8221 ; . This making work can be characterized by the followers: 2. Actuality of the subject. Verbals are the signifiers of the verb intermediary in many of their lexico-grammatical characteristics between the verb and the non-processual parts of address. The assorted characteristics of these signifiers are revealed in the chief domains of the part-of-speech word picture, i. We will write a custom essay sample on Syntax and semantics of verbals in English or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page e. in their significance, structural marker, combinability, and syntactic maps. The processual significance is exposed by them in a substantial or adjectival-adverbial reading: they render procedures as curious sorts of substances and belongingss. They are formed by particular morphemic elements which do non show either grammatical clip or temper ( the most specific finite verb classs ) . They can be combined with verbs like non-processual lexemes ( executing non-verbal maps in the sentence ) , and they can be combined with non-processual lexemes like verbs ( executing verbal maps in the sentence ) . This is the really job of the verbals in English grammar. So, standing on such land, I consider that this job is existent plenty to be investigated. 3. The undertakings and purposes of the work. 1. The first undertaking of my work is to give definition to term # 8220 ; verbals # 8221 ; . 2. The 2nd undertaking is to qualify each type of verbals from grammatical point of position. 3. The purpose of 3rd is to depict syntactical maps of each verbal. 4. The last undertaking is to depict buildings with this verbals and their semantic significance. 4. The freshness of the work. I consider that the freshness of the work is revealed in new stuffs of the linguists which were published in the Internet. One more freshness is that I will include in this work some control exercises on verbals utilizing, which I had worked out and approbated during my pedagogical pattern. 5. Practical significance of the work. In my sentiment the practical significance of my work is difficult to be overvalued. This work reflects modern tendencies in linguistics and I hope it would function as a good manual for those who wants to get the hang modern English linguistic communication. Besides this work can be used by instructors of English linguistic communication for learning English grammar. 6. Wayss of scientific probe used within the work. The chief method for roll uping our work is the method of comparative analysis, interlingual rendition method and the method of statistical research. 7. William claude dukenfields of elaboration. The present work might happen a good manner of connoting in the undermentioned domains: 1. In High Schools and scientific circles of lingual sort it can be successfully used by instructors and philologues as modern stuff for composing research works covering with English verbals. 2. It can be used by instructors of schools, secondary schools and colleges by instructors of English as a practical manual for learning English grammar. 3. It can be utile for everyone who wants to enlarge his/her cognition in English. 8. Linguists worked with the subject. As the base for my making work I used the plants of such world-known linguists as V. Kaushanskaya, B.I.Rogovskaya, B.A.Ilyish, Gordon E.M. , O.Jespersen and others [ 1 ]. 9. Content of the work. The present making work consists of four parts: debut, the chief portion, decision and bibliography. It besides includes the appendix where some interesting Internet stuffs, tabular arraies, strategies were gathered. Within the debut portion, which includes two points we gave the brief description of my making work ( the first point ) and gave general impression of the term # 8220 ; Verbals # 8221 ; . The chief portion of our making work includes several points. There I discussed such jobs as chief characteristics of English verbals, their syntactic maps, described their function sentence, and semantical significances of buildings with verbals. In the decision to my making work I tried to pull some consequences from the scientific probes made within the chief portion of my making work. In bibliography portion I mentioned more than 20 beginnings of which were used while roll uping the present work. It includes lingual books and articles covering with the subject, a figure of used le xicons and encyclopaedia and besides some cyberspace beginnings. 1.2 Definition of the Term # 8220 ; Verbals # 8221 ; The words of every linguistic communication autumn into categories which are called Partss of Speech. Each portion of address has features of its ain. The parts of address differ from each other in intending, in signifier and in map. One of the parts of address is the Verb. Harmonizing to content, the verb can be described as word denoting action, the term # 8220 ; action # 8221 ; encompassing the significance of activity ( to walk, to talk, to play, to analyze, procedure ( to kip, to wait, to populate ) , province ( to be, to wish, to cognize ) , relation ( to dwell, to resemble, to miss ) and the similar. Harmonizing to signifier, it can be described as a word that has certain grammatical characteristics that are non shared by other parts of address ; they have the class of tense, facet, voice. Harmonizing to the map, verb can be defined as a word doing up the predicate of the sentence. The English Verbs can be divided into two chief groups, harmonizing to the map they perform in the sentence # 8211 ; the finite signifiers and infinite signifiers. [ 2 ] The finite signifiers have the map of the predicate in the sentence and may besides be called the predicate signifiers. The infinite or non-predicative signifiers can hold assorted other maps. These signifiers are besides called the verbals. The infinite signifiers or the verbals, unlike the finite signifiers of the verbs do non show individual, figure or temper. [ 3 ]Therefore, they can non be used as the predicate of a sentence. Like the finite signifiers of the verbs the verbals have tense and voice differentiations, but their tense differentiations differ from those of the finite verb. There are three verbals in English: the participial, the gerund, and the infinitive. In Russian there are besides three infinite signifiers of the verb, but they do non to the full coincide with those in the English linguistic communication. In English the verbals have the undermentioned characteristic traits: a ) They have a dual nature: nominal and verbal. The participle combines the features of a verb with those of an adjective ; the gerund and the infinitive combine the features of a verb with those of a known. B ) The tense differentiations of the verbals are non absolute like those of the finite verbs, but comparative. The signifier of a verbal does non demo whether the action it denotes refers to the present, past or hereafter. It shows merely whether the action expressed by the verbal is coincident with the action expressed by the finite verb or prior to it. [ 4 ] In the sentence a verbal may happen. a ) singling ( without attach toing words ) Eg. She went off smiling. # 8211 ; # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1091 ; # 1096 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; , # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1099 ; # 1073 ; # 1072 ; # 1103 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; . Readingisoutofquestion, Ican # 8217 ; tfixmyattentiononbooks. # 8211 ; # 1054 ; # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1080 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; , # 1103 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1089 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1075 ; # 1072 ; # 1093 ; . B ) in phrase ( i.e. with one or several attach toing words # 8211 ; an object or an adverbial qualifier to the verbal ) . The phrases form syntactic units functioning as one portion of the sentence. A phrase should non be confused with a predicative building. Between the elements of a phrase there is no predicate relation as it does non include a noun or pronoun expressed by a verbal. Eg. Not to perturb his sister, he had said nil to her of the affair. # 8211 ; # 1063 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1091 ; , # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1081 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1101 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; . degree Celsius ) in predicative buildings. Eg. She heard him open the door and travel out the pace. # 8211 ; # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; , # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1082 ; # 1088 ; # 1099 ; # 1083 ; # 1076 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1100 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; . All the verbals can organize predicative buildings. They consist of two elements: a nominal ( noun or pronoun ) and a verbal ( participle, gerund or infinitive ) . The verbal component bases in predicate relation to the nominal component. That is to state it stands in the topic and the predicate of the sentence. It most instances predicative buildings form syntactic units, functioning as one portion of the sentence. Eg. The sat down to supper, Jerry still speaking cheerfully. # 8211 ; # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1091 ; # 1078 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; ; # 1044 ; # 1078 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1078 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; . # 8220 ; Jerry still speaking cheerfully # 8221 ; is a predicate relation to the noun Jerry, which denotes the actor of the action expressed by the participial. II. Main Part Chapter 1 Grammatical Overview of English Verbals 2.1.1 General Characteristics of English Verbals The verb has finite and infinite signifiers, the latter being besides called verbals. The verbals, unlike the finite signifiers of the verb, do non show individual, figure or temper. Therefore they can non be used as the predicate of a sentence. Like the finite signifiers of the verb the verbals have tense and voice differentiations, but their tense differentiations differ greatly from those of the finite verb. There are three verbals in English: the participial, the gerund and the infinitive. In Russian we besides have three infinite signifiers of the verb, but they do non to the full coincide with those in the English linguistic communication ( # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; , # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1077 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; , # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1092 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; ) . The characteristic traits of the verbals. The characteristic traits of the verbals are as follows: 1. They have a dual nature, nominal and verbal. The participle combines the features of a verb with those of an adjective ; the gerund and the infinitive combine the characteristicsof a verb with those of a noun. 2. The tense differentiations of the verbals are non absolute ( likethose of the finite verb ) , but relative ; the signifier of a verbal doesnot show whether the action it denotes refers to the present curate hereafter ; it shows merely whether the action expressed by the verbalis coincident with the action expressed by the finite verb or prior to it. 3. All the verbals can organize predicative buildings, i.e. buildings dwelling of two elements, a nominal ( noun or pronoun ) and a verbal ( participle, gerund or infinitive ) ; the verbal component bases in predicate relation to the nominal component, i.e. in a relation similar to that between the topic and the predicate of the sentence. In most instances predicative buildings form syntactic units, functioning as one portion of the sentence. They sat down to supper, Manston still speaking cheerfully. ( Hardy ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1091 ; # 1078 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; ; # 1052 ; # 1101 ; # 1085 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1078 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; . Manston still speaking cheerfully, is a predicative building with a participial: the participial speaking bases in predicate relation to the noun Manston, which denotes the actor of the action expressed by the participial. In the sentence a verbal may happen: ( a ) singly, i.e. without attach toing words. She went off smiling. ( Dreiser ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1091 ; # 1096 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; , # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1099 ; # 1073 ; # 1072 ; # 1103 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; . Reading is out of the inquiry # 8212 ; I ca nt repair my attending on books. ( Collins ) # 1054 ; # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1080 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; # 8212 ; # 1103 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1089 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1075 ; # 1072 ; # 1093 ; . To make up ones mind is to move. # 1056 ; # 1077 ; # 1096 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 8212 ; # 1079 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1095 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1081 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; . ( B ) in phrases, i.e. with one or several attach toing words ( an object or an adverbial qualifier to the verbal ) . The phrases form syntactic units functioning as one portion of the sentence. A phrase should non be confused with a predicative building: between the elements of a phrase there is no predicate relation as it does non include a noun or pronoun denoting the actor of the action expressed by a verbal. The Windowss of the drawing-room opened to a balcony overlooking the garden. ( Mansfield ) # 1054 ; # 1082 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1093 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1073 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; , # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1083 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1089 ; # 1072 ; # 1076 ; . She tried to calm him by reading aloud. ( Gaskell ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1087 ; # 1099 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1091 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1091 ; # 1093 ; . Not to perturb his sister, he had said nil to her of the affair. ( Hardy ) # 1063 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1091 ; , # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1081 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1101 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; . ( degree Celsius ) in predicative buildings. My kept woman being dead , I had to look out for a new topographic point. ( Ch. Bronte ) # 1058 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1103 ; # 1093 ; # 1086 ; # 1079 ; # 1103 ; # 1081 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1091 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; , # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1096 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1076 ; # 1088 ; # 1091 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; . There is no error about his being a mastermind. ( Shaw ) # 1053 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1103 ; # 1074 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 8212 ; # 1075 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1081 ; . She heard him unbar the door and travel out into the pace. ( Hardy ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; , # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; . 2.1.2TheInfinitive The infinitive stand foring an action in its most general signifier is frequently treated as an initial signifier of the verb [ 5 ], but from the point of position of some linguists [ 6 ]the infinitive developed from the Verbal noun, which in class of clip became expressed, retaining at the same clip some of its nominal belongingss. Therefore in Modern English the infinitive, like the participial and the gerund, has a dual nature, nominal and verbal. 1. The nominal character of the infinitive is manifested in its syntactic maps. The infinitive can be used: ( a ) as the topic of a sentence. To travel on like this was unsafe. ( Galsworthy ) ( B ) as a predicative. Her program was now to drive to Bath during the dark. ( Hardy ) ( degree Celsius ) as an object. I have neer learnt to read or compose. ( Collins ) 2. The verbal features of the infinitive are as follows: ( a ) the infinitive of transitive verbs can take a direct object. He began to experience some wonder ( Eliot ) ( B ) the infinitive can be modified by an adverb. I can non compose so rapidly. ( degree Celsius ) the infinitive has tense and aspect differentiations ; the infinitive of transitive verbs has besides voice differentiations. In Modern English the infinitive has the undermentioned signifiers: Active Passive Indefinite to compose to be written Continuous to be composing to be being written [ 7 ] Perfective to hold written to hold been written Perfect Continuous to hold been composing to hold been being written [ 8 ] The tense and aspect differentiations of the infinitive. Like the tense differentiations of all verbals those of the infinitive are non absolute but comparative. 1. The Indefinite Infinitive expresses an action coincident with the action expressed by the finite verb, so it may mention to the present, past or hereafter. I am glad to run into you. ( Dreiser ) I was glad to see Mr. Paul. ( Ch. Bronte ) Mr. Forsyte will be really glad to see you. ( Galsworthy ) 2. The Continuous Infinitive besides denotes an action coincident with that expressed by the finite verb, but it is an action in advancement. Thus the uninterrupted infinitive is non merely a tense signifier, but besides an aspect signifier, showing both clip dealingss and the mode in which the action is presented. They happened, at the minute, to be standing near a little conservatory at the terminal of the garden. ( Collins ) # 1042 ; # 1101 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1103 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1086 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1073 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1100 ; # 1096 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1078 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1094 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1072 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; . 3. The Perfect Infinitive denotes an action prior to the action expressed by the finite verb. I m glad to hold seen you, he said. ( Dreiser ) # 171 ; # 1071 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1076 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 187 ; , # 8212 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; . An confidant friend is said to hold dined with him that twenty-four hours. ( Hardy ) # 1043 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1103 ; # 1090 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1101 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1100 ; # 1091 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1079 ; # 1082 ; # 1080 ; # 1081 ; # 1076 ; # 1088 ; # 1091 ; # 1075 ; . After such verbs as to intend, to anticipate, to mean, to trust used in the Past Indefinite, the Perfect Infinitive shows that the hope or purpose was non carried out. I meant to hold gone at that place. # 1071 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1080 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1091 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; ( # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; ) . I meant to hold given you five shillings this forenoon for a Christmas-box, Sam. Illgiveityouthisafternoon, Sam. ( Dickens ) # 1071 ; # 1093 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1087 ; # 1103 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1096 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; , # 1057 ; # 1101 ; # 1084 ; ; # 1103 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1102 ; # 1080 ; # 1093 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1085 ; # 1103 ; , # 1057 ; # 1101 ; # 1084 ; . The same significance can be conveyed by the Past Perfect of the finite verb followed by the Indefinite Infinitive. I had meant to travel at that place. He had meant to get married me. ( Eliot ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; # 1078 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; . Some English syntacticians prefer the latter building. Note. # 8212 ; The thought, nevertheless, is frequently expressed in the undermentioned manner: I meant to travel at that place, but neer did. 4. The Perfect Continuous Infinitive denotes an action which lasted a certain clip before the action of the finite verb. It is non merely a tense signifier, but besides an aspect signifier. For approximately 10 yearss we seemed to hold been populating on nil but cold meat, bar and staff of life and jam. ( Jerome ) # 1044 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1081 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1084 ; # 1099 ; , # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; , # 1087 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1100 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1093 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1085 ; # 1099 ; # 1084 ; # 1084 ; # 1103 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; , # 1087 ; # 1077 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1100 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1080 ; # 1093 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1073 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1089 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1100 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; . The voice differentiations of the infinitive. The infinitive of transitive verbs has particular signifiers for the Active and the Passive Voice: It is so glorious to love and to be loved ( Stone ) # 1058 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1082 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1102 ; # 1073 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1080 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1083 ; # 1102 ; # 1073 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1099 ; # 1084 ; . In sentences with the building there is the infinitive of some verbs can be active or inactive without any alteration in the significance: There s no clip to lose. ( Dreiser ) There is no clip to be lost. ( Eliot ) There is nil to fear ( to be feared ) . The usage of the infinitive without the atom to ( the bare infinitive ) . In Modern English the infinitive is chiefly used with the atom to [ 9 ]. In Old English to was a preposition used with the infinitive in the dative instance to bespeak intent ( to writenne meant in order to compose ) . Subsequently on to was re-interpreted as the formal mark of the infinitive and came to be used non merely to denote purpose but in other instances as good. Still there are instances when the alleged bare infinitive ( the infinitive without the atom to ) is used. [ 10 ]They are as follows: 1. After subsidiary verbs. I do nt understand the significance of this transition. We shall travel at that place at one time. 2. After average verbs except the verb ought. If one can non hold what one loves, one must love what one has ( Wilson ) 3. After verbs denoting sense perceptual experience, such as to hear, to see, to experience etc. In a few proceedingss they heard him go up the ladder to his ain room. ( Hardy ) # 1063 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1079 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1100 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1072 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1094 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1102 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1091 ; . I neer saw, you look so earlier. ( Hardy ) # 1071 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1093 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1096 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1103 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; . I felt my bosom leap. ( Heym ) # 1071 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1091 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1091 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1103 ; # 1105 ; # 1082 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1076 ; # 1094 ; # 1077 ; . The verb to be after the verb to experience is used with the atom to: I felt this to be really true. ( Dickens ) # 1071 ; # 1095 ; # 1091 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1101 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; . 4. After the verb to allow. Let us be the best friends in the universe! ( Dickens ) 5. After the verb # 8220 ; to do # 8221 ; in the significance of # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1083 ; # 1103 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; and the verb # 8220 ; to hold # 8221 ; in the significance of # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1083 ; # 1103 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; , # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; , # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; . What makes you believe so? ( Carter ) # 1063 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1083 ; # 1103 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1076 ; # 1091 ; # 1084 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; ? I had them take my luggage. ( Hemingway ) # 1071 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1074 ; # 1079 ; # 1103 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1073 ; # 1072 ; # 1075 ; # 1072 ; # 1078 ; . The verb to hold in the significance of # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; is chiefly used after the modal verbs will and would in negative sentences. I will non hold you name him Daniel any more. ( Trollope ) # 1071 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1091 ; # 1097 ; # 1091 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1078 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1099 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1044 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1101 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; . 1 would non hold you think that I am selfish. ( Trollope ) # 1071 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1091 ; # 1097 ; # 1091 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1089 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1103 ; # 1101 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; . 6. After the verb to cognize when its significance attacks that of to see, to detect ( the verb to cognize neer has this significance in the Present Indefinite ) . I have so frequently known a alteration of medical specialty work admirations. ( Shaw ) # 1071 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1095 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1095 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1095 ; # 1091 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1072 ; . In this instance, nevertheless, the atom to is sometimes used: I have neer known her to cry before. ( Cronin ) # 1071 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; , # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1100 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1087 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; . After the verbs # 8216 ; to hear # 8217 ; , # 8216 ; to see # 8217 ; , # 8216 ; to do # 8217 ; and # 8216 ; to cognize # 8217 ; in the Passive Voice the to-Infinitive is used. He was heard to advert your name several times. # 1057 ; # 1083 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; , # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1100 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1091 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1103 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1103 ; . They were seen to go forth the house early in the forenoon. # 1042 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1091 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1080 ; # 1079 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1072 ; . The kid was made to obey. # 1056 ; # 1077 ; # 1073 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1091 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; . Sir Pitt Crawley was neer known to give away a shilling or to make a good action. # 1053 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1089 ; # 1101 ; # 1088 ; # 1055 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1090 ; # 1050 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1091 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1073 ; # 1091 ; # 1076 ; # 1100 ; # 1096 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1075 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; . 7. After the verb to offer. I bowed and waited, believing she would offer me take a place. ( E. Bronte ) # 1071 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1082 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; # 1080 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; , # 1076 ; # 1091 ; # 1084 ; # 1072 ; # 1103 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; . The verb to offer is disused and is non used in conversational address. 8. After the looks had better, would instead, would sooner, can non but, nil but, can non take but. You had better travel to bed and leave the patient to me. ( Shaw ) # 1042 ; # 1099 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1083 ; # 1091 ; # 1095 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1087 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1080 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1087 ; # 1072 ; # 1094 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1077 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1080 ; . I would instead non talk upon the topic. ( Hardy ) , # 1071 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1101 ; # 1090 ; # 1091 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1091 ; . I would sooner dice here, .at your pess than see you married to such a 1 as that. ( Trollope ) # 1071 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1091 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1079 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; , # 1091 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1096 ; # 1080 ; # 1093 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; , # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1091 ; # 1078 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; . 1 can non but think so. ( Trollope ) # 1071 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1091 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1091 ; # 1084 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; . There was nil left for him to make but watch and wait. # 1045 ; # 1076 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1091 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; , # 8212 ; # 1101 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1073 ; # 1083 ; # 1102 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1080 ; # 1078 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; . She does nil but make scenes from forenoon boulder clay dark. ( Shaw ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1100 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; , # 1095 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1089 ; # 1094 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1099 ; # 1089 ; # 1091 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; . I looked long at that image, and could non take but look. ( Ch. Bronte ) # 1071 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1101 ; # 1090 ; # 1091 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1077 ; . # 8216 ; Had better # 8217 ; , # 8216 ; would instead # 8217 ; , # 8216 ; to make nil but # 8217 ; belong to conversational English, whereas can non but and can non take but are characteristic of elevated manner. 9. In sentences of a particular type ( infinitive sentences ) get downing with why. Why non come and speak to her yourself? ( Reade ) # 1055 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1091 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1089 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1081 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1089 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1081 ; ? The atom to is frequently used without the infinitive if it is easy understood from the context. He and his three work forces could non support Rollingen even if they wanted to. ( Heym ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1103 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1056 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1075 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; , # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1078 ; # 1077 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1093 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; . The atom # 8216 ; to # 8217 ; may be separated from the infinitive by an adverb ; this is the alleged split infinitive. It is barely of all time used in conversational English. He was unable, nevertheless, to hanker keep silence. ( Galsworthy ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1083 ; , # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; , # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1103 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1095 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; . 2.1.3 General Characteristics of Participles The participial is a infinite signifier of the verb which has a verbal and an adjectival or an adverbial character. [ 11 ] There are two participials in English # 8212 ; Participle I and Participle II, traditionally called the Present Participle and the Past Participle. These traditional footings are unfastened to objection on the land that Participle I does non needfully mention to the present, merely as Participle II need non mention to the yesteryear. The difference between them is non a difference in tense, but chiefly a difference in voice. Participle I is formed by adding the postfix -ing [ 12 ]to the root of the verb ; the following spelling regulations should be observed: ( a ) If a verb ends in a deaf-and-dumb person vitamin E, the deaf-and-dumb person vitamin E is dropped beforeadding the postfix -ing: to give # 8212 ; giving, to shut # 8212 ; shutting. ( B ) If a verb ends in a consonant preceded by a vowel renderinga short stressed sound, the concluding consonant is doubled before addingthe postfix -ing: to run # 8212 ; running, to bury # 8212 ; burying, to acknowledge # 8212 ; acknowledging. A concluding cubic decimeter is doubled if it is preceded by a vowel missive rendering a short vowel sound, stressed or unstressed: to throw out # 8212 ; throw outing, to go # 8212 ; going. ( degree Celsius ) The verbs to decease, to lie and to bind form Participle I in the undermentioned manner: death, lying, binding. A concluding # 1091 ; is non changed before adding the postfix -ing: to follow # 8212 ; following, to deny # 8212 ; denying. The formation of Participle II. Harmonizing to the manner in which the Past Indefinite and Participle II are formed, verbs are divided into three groups: regular verbs, irregular verbs, and assorted verbs. 1. Regular verbs. They form the Past Indefinite and Participle II by adding -ed to the root of the verb, or merely -d if the root of the verb ends in -e. [ 13 ] to desire # 8212 ; wanted The pronunciation of -ed ( -d ) depends on the sound predating it. It is pronounced: [ # 305 ; vitamin D ] after T, vitamin D: wanted [ w # 596 ; nt # 305 ; vitamin D ] , landed [ cubic decimeter # 230 ; nd # 305 ; vitamin D ] [ vitamin D ] after sonant consonants except vitamin D and after vowels: opened [ # 601 ; up # 601 ; nd ] , played [ ple # 305 ; 500 ] ; [ T ] after unvoiced consonants except T: worked [ w # 601 ; : karat ] . The undermentioned spelling regulations should be observed: ( a ) Final # 1091 ; is changed into I before the add-on of -ed if it is preceded by a consonant. to transport # 8212 ; carried # 1091 ; remains unchanged if it is preceded by a vowel. to bask # 8212 ; enjoyed ( B ) If a verb ends in a consonant preceded by a short stressed vowel, the concluding consonant is doubled. to halt # 8212 ; stopped Final R is doubled if it is preceded by a stressed vowel. to happen # 8212 ; occurred Final R is non doubled when preceded by a diphthong, to look # 8212 ; appeared Final cubic decimeter is doubled if it is preceded by a short vowel, stressed or unstressed: to oblige # 8212 ; compelled 2. Irregular verbs. Here belong the following groups of verbs: ( a ) verbs which change their root vowel. to sing # 8212 ; sang # 8212 ; Sung ( B ) verbs which change their root vowel and add -en for Participle II. to talk # 8212 ; spoke # 8212 ; spoken ( degree Celsius ) verbs which change their root vowel and add -d or -t. to sell # 8212 ; sold # 8212 ; sold ( vitamin D ) verbs which change their concluding -d into -t. to direct # 8212 ; sent # 8212 ; sent ( vitamin E ) verbs which have the same signifier for the Infinitive, Past Indefinite and Participle II. to set # 8212 ; put # 8212 ; put ( degree Fahrenheit ) verbs whose signifiers come from different roots. to be # 8212 ; was, were # 8212 ; been to travel # 8212 ; went # 8212 ; gone ( g ) particular irregular verbs. to hold # 8212 ; had # 8212 ; had to do # 8212 ; made # 8212 ; made to make # 8212 ; did # 8212 ; done ( H ) defective ( anomalous ) verbs. can # 8212 ; could must ought may # 8212 ; might will # 8212 ; would shall # 8212 ; should 3. Assorted verbs, their Past Indefinite is of the regular type, and their Participle It is of the irregular type: to demo # 8212 ; showed # 8212 ; shown As has already been stated, the participial has a verbal and an adjectival or adverbial character. Its adjectival or adverbial character is manifested in its syntactic maps, those of property or adverbial qualifier. ( Some participials have lost their verbality wholly and have become adjectives: interesting, capturing, dismaying, etc. , complicated, distinguished, furnished, etc. E.g. an interesting book, a charming miss, the dismaying intelligence ; a complicated job, a distinguished author, a equipped flat. ) I hated the hollow sound of the rain sprinkling on the roof. ( DuMarnier ) ( property ) # 1052 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1091 ; # 1093 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1096 ; # 1091 ; # 1084 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1076 ; # 1103 ; , # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1091 ; # 1095 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1082 ; # 1088 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; . And so she turned to the title-page, and looked at the name written in the schoolboy manus. ( Ch. Bronte ) ( property ) # 1047 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1082 ; # 1088 ; # 1099 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1075 ; # 1091 ; # 1087 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1100 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1080 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1103 ; , # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1087 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1091 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1080 ; # 1084 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; . The verbal features of the participial are as follows: 1. Participle I of a transitive verb can take a direct object. Opening the door, he went out on to the patio. ( Galsworthy ) 2. Participle I and Participle II can be modified by an adverb. Leaving the room hastily, he ran out. ( Thackeray ) Deeply affected, Priam Farll rose and left the room. ( Bennett ) 3. Participle I has tense differentiations ; Participle I of transitiveverbs has besides voice differentiations. In Modern English Participle Ihas the undermentioned signifiers: Active Passive Indefinite composing being written Perfective holding written holding been written The tense differentiations of the participial. Like the tense differentiations of all the verbals, those of the participial are non absolute but comparative. Participle I Indefinite Active and Passive normally denotes an action coincident with the action expressed by the finite verb ; depending on the tense-form of the finite verb it may mention to the present, past, or hereafter. When reading The Pickwick Papers, one ca nt assist laughing. When reading The Pickwick Papers, I could nt assist laughing. When reading The Pickwick Papers, you will howl with laughter. He looked at the rug while waiting for her reply. ( Galsworthy ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1089 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; , # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1072 ; # 1103 ; # 1077 ; # 1077 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; . Me returned to the hut, conveying in his weaponries a new-born lamb. ( Hardy ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; # 1074 ; # 1093 ; # 1080 ; # 1078 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; , # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1091 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1093 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1078 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1103 ; # 1075 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; . Bing left entirely, Pauline and I kept silence for some clip. ( Ch. Bronte ) # 1054 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1096 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; , # 1084 ; # 1099 ; # 1089 ; # 1055 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1103 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1095 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; . Sometimes Participle I Indefinite denotes an action mentioning tono peculiar clip. The last turning had brought them into the high-road leading to Bath. ( Hardy ) # 1055 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1091 ; , # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1091 ; # 1097 ; # 1091 ; # 1102 ; ( # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1103 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; ) # 1074 ; # 1041 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; . Participle I Perfect Active and Passive denotes an action prior to the action expressed by the finite verb. Mr. Bumble, holding spread a hankie over his articulatio genuss , began to eat and imbibe. ( Dickens ) # 1052 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1041 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1073 ; # 1083 ; , # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1079 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1087 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1082 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1103 ; # 1093 ; , # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1080 ; # 1087 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; . They were, so, old friends, holding been at school together. ( Walpole ) # 1054 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1073 ; # 1099 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1099 ; # 1084 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1088 ; # 1091 ; # 1079 ; # 1100 ; # 1103 ; # 1084 ; # 1080 ; , # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1074 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1091 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1089 ; # 1100 ; # 1074 ; # 1096 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; . It should be noted that a anterior action is non ever expressed by Participle I Perfect: with some verbs of sense perceptual experience and gesture, such as to see, to hear, to come, to get, to prehend, to look, to turn and some others, Participle I Indefinite is used even when precedence is meant. Turning down an vague street and come ining an obscurer lane, lie went up to a Smith s store. ( Hardy ) # 1057 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1074 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1102 ; # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1094 ; # 1091 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1076 ; # 1103 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1097 ; # 1077 ; # 1073 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1099 ; # 1081 ; # 1087 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1091 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1082 ; , # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1082 ; # 1082 ; # 1091 ; # 1079 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1094 ; # 1077 ; . Hearing a footfall below he rose and went to the top of the stepss. ( Hardy ) # 1059 ; # 1089 ; # 1083 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1075 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1079 ; # 1091 ; , # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1099 ; # 1096 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1094 ; # 1091 ; . Participle II has no tense differentiations ; ithas merely one formwhich can show both an action coincident with, and prior to the action expressed by the finite verb ; thelatter instance is morefrequent. His sister s eyes fixed on him with a certain amazement, obliged him at last to look at Fleur. ( Galsworthy ) # 1042 ; # 1079 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1103 ; # 1076 ; # 1089 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1099 ; , # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1099 ; # 1081 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1099 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1076 ; # 1086 ; # 1091 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; , # 1079 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1090 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; , # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1094 ; , # 1074 ; # 1079 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1103 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1090 ; # 1100 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; # 1060 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; . I was reminded of a portrayal seen in a gallery. ( DuMaurier ) # 1052 ; # 1085 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1089 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1083 ; # 1089 ; # 1103 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; , # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1099 ; # 1081 ; # 1103 ; # 1074 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1077 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1075 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1077 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1077 ; . In some instances Participle II denotes an action mentioning to no peculiar clip. He is a adult male loved and admired by everybody. The voice differentiations of the participial. Participle I of transitive verbs has particular signifiers to denote the active and the inactive voice. When composing letters lie does non wish to be disturbed. Bing written in pencil the missive was hard to do out. Having written some letters he went to post them. Having been written long ago the manuscript was illegible. Participle II of transitive verbs has a inactive significance, e. g. a broken glass, a caged bird. Participle II of intransitive verbs has no inactive significance ; it is used merely in compound tense-forms and has no independent [ smarm in the sentence unless it belongs to a verb which denotes go throughing into a new province, e. g. a shriveled flower, a bleached foliage. 2.1.4 The Gerund The gerund developed from the verbal noun, which in class of clip became expressed preserving at the same clip its nominal character. The gerund is formed by adding the postfix -ing to the root of the verb, and coincides in signifier with Participle I. [ 14 ] As a natural consequence of its beginning and development the gerund has nominal and verbal belongingss. The nominal features of the gerund are as follows: 1. The gerund can execute the map of topic, object and predicative. They say smoking leads to speculation. ( Collins ) ( SUBJECT ) I like doing people happy. ( Shaw ) ( OBJECT ) The responsibility of all progressive world is contending for peace. ( PREDICATIVE ) 2. The gerund can be preceded by a preposition. I am really, really tired of rowing. ( Hemingway )

Jane Eyre Film Study essays

Jane Eyre Film Study essays It is common for either very well written books or those made popular by the general public to be made into movies. Most people who are avid readers make a point of reading the book first before viewing the movie. They believe seeing the movie version first ruins the book. This point is especially true for a literary masterpiece such as Jane Eyre. The author, Charlotte Bronte, wrote an incredible story of the orphan Janes life in such a descriptive manner that the reader is captured and feels as if he or she is in the story with Jane as she narrates it. No movie can reproduce the literary elements and themes as well as the written word of the author herself. The readers mind is taken on a journey as it does the work of exploring and imagining the story coming to life as the plot unfolds. Watching the movie after one has read and studied the novel does, however, help to put a picture to word. It takes the images the reader has envisioned and turns them into 3-D as the characters co me to life through the settings and acting. The setting of the red room in the book, which is found in chapter two, is described thoroughly as the room itself is symbolic of death, terror and confinement. On a deeper and more personal level, it is a symbol of things Jane has to overcome to find happiness. One of the grandest bedrooms or chambers in the Gateshead mansion, the red room was still rarely used; Jane describes it as being cold, silent, remote and solemn, containing a huge four poster dark mahogany bed. It has deep red drapes hanging from the four massive pillars and the bed is made with crisp, white linens. She describes a beautiful, stately room with an unlit fireplace and grand furniture and mirror but to her it represents more of a tomb; the place her Uncle Reed spent his last days and died. The settings are very similar between the book and the movie with a few differences bei ...

Entrepreneurial Management and Leadership Essay

Entrepreneurial Management and Leadership - Essay Example nternal efforts to sustain competitive advantages through the process of innovation which serves to change the balance of competitive dominance in an established industry. This report aims to identify the corporate entrepreneurship behaviours at the Sony Corporation, a multi-national firm operating in the consumer electronics industry; a highly saturated competitive environment. Utilising a mixed methodology of secondary and primary research, this study undertakes a qualitative analysis of CE activities (or lack thereof) at the identified corporation to determine entrepreneurial behavioural impact on strategic initiatives, innovation, organisational structure and culture at the firm. A general qualitative analysis of the firm’s current competitive advantages and competitive market position is inclusive in the research. It is assumed that Sony Corporation, a company with a rich history of operations established in 1946, maintains significant entrepreneurial behaviour internally. Upon Sony’s establishment, the business only maintained $530 in available capital and maintained a workforce of only eight employees (Abiko 1966). With such a limited volume of available resources, Sony was able to convince Bell Labs to license the new innovation, the transistor, which ultimately led to Sony being a pioneering market entrant for launch of the first transistor radio. It is unlikely that Sony maintained limited entrepreneurial behaviours in its long history, an assumption based on a rich history of being a market innovator in many different product categories. This assumption will be tested utilising research on the firm. During the 1970s, Sony’s most important market, the United States, maintained a very negative perception regarding the quality of Japanese-made products. However, Sony continued to outperform many American-produced products in the consumer electronics industry which radically changed U.S. consumer perceptions of the made in Japan label (Lohr 1983).

Mises vs weber Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Mises vs weber - Essay Example Mises’ economic analyses of bureaucracy also identified the key differences between bureaucracy, profitable organisations, and unprofitable organisations. He demonstrated that â€Å"government bureaucracy will be unable to engage in an economic calculation and thus will suffer from significant inefficiencies† (Francu and Hociung 159). Consequently, Mises clearly distinguished between bureaucratic management and profit management. On the other hand, Weber, considered as the ‘father’ of bureaucracy, proposed the fundamentals of an explicit theory of bureaucracy (Francu and Hociung 159). He not only pioneered the most â€Å"comprehensive, classic formulations about the characteristics of bureaucracy†, but his ideas also ranged across a whole spectrum of historical, political, economic, and political thought† (Weber (2) 50). According to Francu and Hociung (159), he built on the premise that increasing efficiency of the bureaucratic organisations in carrying out complex activities resulted in the growth of the bureaucratic organisation. Thus, the ideal bureaucratic system was an organisational scheme where competence and not force or tradition formed the basis for the allocation of power (Weber (1) 25-30). Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the opposing perspectives of Ludwig von Mises and Max Weber on bureaucracy and its consequences on society. It will be argued that Mises had a better understanding and a more realistic approach emphasizing bureaucracy’s adverse effects on society and the economy, as compared to Weber’s views on the need for institutional structure. Mises’ Austrian sociology is similar in some respects to the Weberian school; however they are two different methodologies. They usually address different topics. With the discipline of sociology becoming institutionalized around the Durkheimian or Weberian schools, Anderson (3)

Liquor Ad Campaigns for Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Liquor Ad Campaigns for Analysis - Essay Example The campaign spans online advertising, television, events, social media and print. Four young artists are featured, and who Absolut describes as â€Å"daring spirits with a dedication to continuously transform the possibilities of personal expression.† It has as its core message the fact that young adults can free themselves from the idea of predetermined life events that might control their future. Though previous campaigns have also tapped from art, Transforming Today seems to be more active in transformation stimulation and in pushing forward the cultural scene. The artists making up the creative team in running the campaign includes a French national who does music, design and illustration apart from being a director, a digital media artist from America, an emerging fashion designer from France and a graphic novel artist from Brazil. It targets urban millennial who connect with creativity and who have the belief that the future is not written but to be created, which they can together with helping shape society. Its TV adverts run in sixty or ninety seconds of the three featuring together doing their work with thirty seconds spots for each of the artists. The online advertising appears on sites related to creative disciplines that the four artists work in, including music, design and fashion. The social media campaign involves engagement and outreach through the brand’s Twitter and Face book accounts, also through other artistic communities’ sites. From this promotional campaign, I think Absolut is in a bid to change its image as perceived by every member of the society. The approach is wisely calculated to draw every member of the society’s positive perception of its intent. The campaign casts an overall image of responsibility and positive thinking and action that would ultimately benefit the individual and society. It comes about as trying to shake off

Punishment And Rehabilitation In The Community Criminology Essay

Punishment And Rehabilitation In The Community Criminology Essay Critically evaluate the use of the prison as a sentence of the court in England and Wales over the last 20 years. The 1990s witnessed a sharp rise in the politicization and in the severity of sentencing policy (Maguire et al, 2007). Since the 1990s legislation has been heavily criticised, this saw the abandonment of key pillars, yet the rise of others. Therefore, The Criminal Justice Act as somewhat revolutionised bringing forward newer legislation over the years that have impacted on the way sentences are used. The change in government from Conservative to New Labour also saw a bewildered mixture of new polices, which have contributed and influenced the use of the prison. Since the post war years the prison population began to expand, which led to a sense of crisis for the government from two perspectives. The first was in terms of social control. The significant and rapidly rising prison population had the potential to be perceived as a breakdown in social order. The other area of concern was due to the expanding prison population and the increase in expenditure. At the time the government were trying to reduce expenditure and instigate new community sentences to limit the number of offenders who actually went to prison. Consequently, there have been many theorists who have attempted to structure the criminal justice system. There have also been new ideologies for how the prison should be used as a sentence. By analysing the use of the prison it will help to define contemporary prisons in western societies, not least since there is considerable consensus that the penal system in England and Wales has been in a state of ever deepening crisis since the 1960s (Maguire et al, 2007). Statistics show a major increase in the prison population. In 1989 the prison population was 48,600 throughout the year and in 2008 the prison population increased to 83,190. Crime measured by the British Crime Survey (BCS) fell from 18.5 million offences in 1993 to 11.7 million by 2003/04. BCS crime fell by around a third in England and Wales at the same time as the prison population increased by two-thirds (Home Office 2008). These statistics suggest that the use of the prison has been very effective by how recorded crime rates have fell over the years and that the number of offenders going to prison as increased. However, it strikes controversy due to the increase in prison populations. In 1997, Labour had created 16,000 more prison places when the Government were trying to reduce expenditure in that area. The lead up to the 1991 Criminal Justice Act witnessed a shift in penal policy. The ongoing concerns of ever growing prison numbers accompanied a widespread disenchantment with the rehabilitative ideal and concerns were raised about the matching of sentences to offenders rather than the crime (Brownlee 1998). The conservative government had issued major changes to the sentencing framework influenced by retributivist theory and the concept of just deserts where offenders were punished in proportion to the crimes they had committed. Also the 1990 white paper, Crime, Justice and Protecting the Public introduced new legislation in the criminal justice system. Now, Community sentences could be used as alternatives rather than the use of imprisonment. Home Office (1990) also claimed a more consistent approach to sentencing so that criminals get there just deserts. The central aims of sentencing were just desserts and proportional sentences; however, deterrence was demoted as a sentence. This criticism was made of the 1991 Act and 1993 Act as there was an unworkable hybrid sentencing framework. The Criminal Justice Act 1991 was clear that the main sentencing decision was to calculate offence seriousness and a proportionate (commensurate) sentence. Prison therefore, was used to keep people in custody by the seriousness of the offence (Easton et al, 2005). Consequently, the use of the prison had changed by acknowledging the seriousness of the offence, whereas before anybody who committed a crime would just go to prison. Thus, somebody convicted with murder would go to prison, whereas somebody who was vandalising would more likely pay a fine or have a community sentence depending on the circumstances. This significant piece of legislation appeared to pave the way for community sentences, and indeed the Probation Service to play a central role in criminal justice policy. Courts were now guided by seriousness thresholds, which required them to justify why a sentence was either serious enough for a community penalty, or so serious that only a custodial sentence could be warranted (Cavadino Dignan 2002). By 1993 however the incoming Home Secretary made it clear that he was an advocate of custodial measures for offenders in his statement Prison Works. The 1993 Criminal Justice Act rescinded on some of the positive aspects of the earlier 1991 Act, and marked a resurrection of law and order rhetoric in determining criminal justice policy. By 1995 in the Green Paper Strengthening Punishment in the Community, despite the considerable changes brought about to community sentences by the 1991 Criminal Justice Act, the claim was made that probation supervision was still regarded as a soft option. The subsequent White Paper Protecting the Public clearly emphasised the need for community sentences to have a punitive rather than rehabilitative focus, and called upon these sentences to be physically, mentally or emotionally challenging with a stress on personal responsibility and discipline. The rapid increase in the prison population and the numbers sent to prison represented a radical break with the virtual stability of previous decades. Even so, two considerations should be borne in mind before attributing the total responsibility for the increase in prison population solely to Michael Howard. First there is some evidence that public opinion took a more punitive turn in the 1990s, which might explain why the anticipated public outcry against Howards policies was so muted, and why the mass media were largely supportive of these policies (Hough, 1996). Ryan (2002) also argued that a series of moral panics was manipulated by politicians to win the support of voters for a tougher law and order platform. Populist Punitiveness had a major effect on legislation because it became central to the concerns of the general public and there responses to crime. A synopsis of the 1991 and 1993 Criminal Justice Act highlight the use of the prison by how serious the crime is. The prison is used to confiscate liberty and by 1993 and the use of community sentences made it more definable by the level of crime committed by using seriousness thresholds. However, by 1995 they recognised that the probation service was to soft and needed amendments. The use of the prison was now seen as a last resort or for very serious offences. In addition, public opinion had a major influence on crime, which is argued one of the reasons why the prison population is said to be so high due to the publics view and fear of crime. In May 1997, the Conservative Party was ejected from power as Labour; Led by Tony Blair enjoyed a landslide victory. Tony Blair, thought to alter Labour to New Labour, and one of the ways he did this was through public image by becoming tough on crime (Mathews 1999). Labour introduced a various amount of legislation, which led to the circulation of community penalties. This was evident in the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act, which created the Drug Treatment Testing Order, and the 2000 Criminal Justice and Court Services Act. This brought about the Probation Order, Community Service Order and the Combination Order. Two further sentences were also created that are the Exclusion Order and the Drug Abstinence Order. However, the Drug Abstinence Order was later abandoned as it was proved unworkable; this could be due to Populist Punitivism. The conservative government have a right wing approach, whereas New Labour comes from the left. This however, had little effect for the use of the prison as labour emphasised on the conservative approach to crime and made it stronger. Although there was new legislation that gave the court more power and options over the offender, prison numbers continued to rise. This was also apparent when David Blunkett became Home Secretary as the prison population started to rapidly grow months after (Guardian 2001). In 2001, the prison crisis of over crowding, and the fiscal problems were highlighted again, which resulted in new legislation from results drawn from the Halliday Report. The review was born out of a belief that the present sentencing framework suffers from serious deficiencies that reduce its contributions to crime reduction and public confidence (Halliday 2001). The report highlighted key limitations and suggested new approaches to strengthen the criminal justice system. One of the highlighted problems was the short prison sentences of less than 12 months and that they had no effect on the offender. It was also noted that persistent offenders do not appear to receive significantly longer prison sentences. Halliday (2001) shows that in a sample of male offenders aged over 18 and sentenced in1998, the average sentence for burglary for an offender with 10 or more previous convictions was only 4 months more than somebody with no convictions. The Halliday Report led to the White Paper in 2002, Justice For All, which sets out the Governments far reaching proposals for the reform of the criminal justice system and resulted in the 2003 Criminal Justice Act. The Halliday Report noted that just deserts and the punishment fitting the crime are key features of the statutory framework set up in 1991 and that there is nothing wrong with this in itself. However the report now focuses on three tiers of seriousness established by the Act: fines, community punishment and custody (Easton, 2005). This created a new framework and therefore saw the collapse of just deserts. Instead of focusing on just how serious the crime was for punishment, the court now had power to punish the offender in many of different ways depending on the offence. From the 2001 Halliday Report and the 2002 White Paper the new findings created a new framework to sentences. The Act clearly sets out the purposes of sentencing, which include retributive, deterrence and reductive, reform rehabilitation, public protection, and reparation, (Criminal Justice Act 2003). The Halliday Report also influenced the new legislation in 2003 by identifying a gap in the sentencing framework. The Act replaced all the adult community sentences with a generic community sentence. This allowed the courts to attach requirements to this community sentence from a number of options; supervision, unpaid work, activities, prohibited activities, accredited programmes, curfew, exclusion, residence, mental health treatment, drug rehabilitation, alcohol treatment, attendance centre (for under 25 yr olds) (Criminal Justice Act 2003). The Criminal Justice Act 2003 also introduced a number of other measures such as Conditional Cautions, Strengthened deferment of sentence to include an element of probation supervision, Custody Plus, Intermittent Custody, new Suspended Sentence Order; however, these measures show unclear boundaries between community and custodial penalties. Thus, the argument against this is whether the courts will favour a custody followed by a rehabilitative sentence and that they will become more popular, which will help reduce overcrowding. Faulkner (2002) prior to the 2003 Criminal Justice Act urged caution in seeing the introduction of a new sentencing framework as the answer to addressing crime. He states that: If the new sentences are to contribute to reduced rates of crime or re-offending, they will at the very least have to be applied in the context of a prison system which is no longer distracted by overcrowding, of a well-resourced and innovative National Probation Service. This may sugge st that there is a covert meaning under the new framework for the use of imprisonment. By utilising community sentences it is thought that this will free prison space, which will stop over crowding and make punishment worth while. However, statistics show far greater use is being made of the prison and probation service because in 1996, 85,000 offenders were given a custodial sentence and 133,000 were given a community sentence. By 2001, both had increased by 25 per cent, with 107,000 offenders given a custodial sentence and 166,000 offenders receiving a community sentence (reference). The use of the prison as changed significantly over the years, with a major influence from the change in government and the change in the sentencing framework. Originally, the prison was used for any type of crime but due to over crowding the government came to recognise that the prison should be used for the more serious offences and introduced the community service for petty crimes. Community service was perceived to free up prison space and the fiscal crisis, however the prison population kept expanding over the years. This could be due to the numbers of offenders caught and sentenced as police powers had expanded or the increase in the overall seriousness of the crimes brought to justice or the increase in the sentence severity for specific offences. New legislation allowed the courts to have an option, however, this soon expanded focusing more on community services using the prison as the last resort. Nobody wants to go to prison; therefore by issuing a community service it is g iving them a strong warning using the prison as the most feared punishment. Individuals who then break the community service punishment will then be sent to prison. A new Act came Criminal justice and immigration act 2008 brought forward the release date of prisoners serving sentences greater than 4 years imposed before 4 April 2005. It did not apply to prisoners serving life sentences or serving sentences for violent or sexual offences. This section came into force on 9 June 2008. This was in order to alleviate prison overcrowding. prisons are for suspects refused bail and detained before trial, or convicted but not yet sentenced, are held in custody to ensure that the course of justice proceeds to its conclusion and that everyone concerned is protected against the likelihood of harm in the interim. The system needs to ensure that the increased investment in prison and probation is targeted effectively to reduce crime and maintain public confidence. The use of prison and probation has increased by over a quarter since 1996, even though the number of people arrested and sentenced has remained broadly constant. The growth is due to the increased severity of sentences, which is linked to the fall in the use of fines. terrorists #3 strikes mandatory life sentence 2003

Admissions Essay - I Will Practice Medicine :: Medicine College Admissions Essays

Admissions Essay - I Will Practice Medicine From the time I was 10 years old, I spent my summers at overnight camp. While baseball and canoeing were fun, I spent my free time in the camp radio station. Sitting at the microphone, my imagination ran wild as I made stories come alive, weaving characters in and out of danger, delivering punch lines, injecting irony. My fingers flew over the controls, pushing buttons, pulling levers at just the right times. I thrived on the creativity and precision it took to sound good on the air. Â   As I grew older, my exposure to the media expanded. My first job out of college was with CNN's Larry King Live, where I spent three exciting years. While the job had its thrills, it became an unsatisfying way to make a living for someone who was taught to work hard for the under-served, think carefully about life's priorities, and live by them everyday. I longed to feed my intellectual curiosity. I wanted to work with my hands and remain involved with people. I was mature enough to work hard for what I wanted. Â   I quit my job at CNN and began taking Pre-Med courses and volunteering in a hospital. I moved from my two-bedroom apartment to a small efficiency. Black-tie affairs with celebrities became TV dinners over a chemistry book. My life was changed. One year later, I continue to donate my time as an Emergency Medical Technician in the Georgetown Emergency Room, and I play my guitar and sing with sick kids in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit. Â   Volunteering has confirmed what I thought - that medicine is where I belong. Even in my limited capacity as a volunteer, bringing a cold patient a blanket or putting a reassuring hand on her shoulder is deeply rewarding. Watching a child smile as we sing Old McDonald, and knowing that, even for a moment, he is thinking about something besides his sick body, keeps me coming back every week. And learning about why our bodies work the way they do has even greater rewards, for a slightly different reason. Â   When I was 13 years old, my mother died after battling liver cancer for a year and a half. I remember very well the first few months after the disease took hold. We tried different drugs and therapies in various doses.

Most Opposition to Abortion Relies Essay

A Defense of Abortion Author(s): Judith Jarvis Thomson Source: Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Autumn, 1971), pp. 47-66 Published by: Blackwell Publishing Stable URL: http://www. jstor. org/stable/2265091 Accessed: 10/01/2010 00:54 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www. jstor. org/page/info/about/policies/terms. jsp. JSTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www. jstor. org/action/showPublisher? publisherCode=black. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor. org. Blackwell Publishing is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy and Public Affairs. http://www. jstor. org JUDITH JARVISTHOMSON A Defense of Abortion’ Most opposition to abortion relies on the premise that the fetus is a human being, a person, from the moment of conception. The premise is argued for, but, as I think, not well. Take, for example, the most common argument. We are asked to notice that the development of a human being from conception through birth into childhood is continuous; then it is said that to draw a line, to choose a point in this development and say â€Å"before this point the thing is not a person, after this point it is a person† is to make an arbitrary choice, a choice for which in the nature of things no good reason can be given. It is concluded that the fetus is, or anyway that we had better say it is, a person from the moment of conception. But this conclusion does not follow. Similar things might be said about the development of an acorn into an oak tree, and it does not follow that acorns are oak trees, or that we had better say they are. Arguments of this form are sometimes called â€Å"slippery slope arguments†-the phrase is perhaps self-explanatory-and it is dismaying that opponents of abortion rely on them so heavily and uncritically. I am inclined to agree, however, that the prospects for â€Å"drawing a line† in the development of the fetus look dim. I am inclined to think also that we shall probably have to agree that the fetus has already become a human person well before birth. Indeed, it comes as a surprise when one first learns how early in its life it begins to acquire human characteristics. By the tenth week, for example, it already has i. I am very much indebted to James Thomson for discussion, criticism, and many helpful suggestions. 48 Philosophy ; Public Affairs a face, arms and legs, fingers and toes; it has internal organs, and brain activity is detectable. 2 On the other hand, I think that the premise is false, that the fetus is not a person from the moment of conception. A newly fertilized ovum, a newly implanted clump of cells, is no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree. But I shall not discuss any of this. For it seems to me to be of great interest to ask what happens if, for the sake of argument, we allow the premise. How, precisely, are we supposed to get from there to the conclusion that abortion is morally impermissible? Opponents of abortion commonly spend most of their time establishing that the fetus is a person, and hardly any time explaining the step from there to the impermissibility of abortion. Perhaps they think the step too simple and obvious to require much comment. Or perhaps instead they are simply being economical in argument. Many of those who defend abortion rely on the premise that the fetus is not a person, but only a bit of tissue that will become a person at birth; and why pay out more arguments than you have to? Whatever the explanation, I suggest that the step they take is neither easy nor obvious, that it calls for closer examination than it is commonly given, and that when we do give it this closer examination we shall feel inclined to reject it. I propose, then, that we grant that the fetus is a person. from the moment of conception. How does the argument go from here? Something like this, I take it. Every person has a right to life. So the fetus has a right to life. No doubt the mother has a right to decide what shall happen in and to her body; everyone would grant that. But surely a person’s right to life is stronger and more stringent than the mother’s right to decide what happens in and to her body, and so outweighs it. So the fetus may not be killed; an abortion may not be performed. It sounds plausible. But now let me ask you to imagine this. You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers 2. Daniel Callahan, Abortion: Law, Choice and Morality (New York, 1970), p. 373. This book gives a fascinating survey of the available information on abortion. The Jewish tradition is surveyed in David M. Feldman, Birth Control in Jewish Law (New York, i968), Part 5, the Catholic tradition in John T. Noonan, Jr. , â€Å"An Almost Absolute Value in History,† in The Morality of Abortion, ed. John T. Noonan, Jr. (Cambridge, Mass. , 1970). 49 A Defense of Abortion has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist’s circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. The director of the hospital now tells you, â€Å"Look, we’re sorry the Society of Music Lovers did this to you-we would never have permitted it if we had known. But still, they did it, and the violinist now is plugged into you. To unplug you would be to kill him. But never mind, it’s only for nine months. By then he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you. † Is it morally incumbent on you to accede to this situation? No doubt it would be very nice of you if you did, a great kindness. But do you have to accede to it? What if it were not nine months, but nine years? Or longer still? What if the director of the hospital says, â€Å"Tough luck, I agree, but you’ve now got to stay in bed, with the violinist plugged into you, for the rest of your life. Because remember this. All persons have a right to life, and violinists are persons. Granted you have a right to decide what happens in and to your body, but a person’s right to life outweighs your right to decide what happens in and to your body. So you cannot ever be unplugged from him. † I imagine you would regard this as outrageous, which suggests that something really is wrong with that plausible-sounding argument I mentioned a moment ago. In this case, of course, you were kidnapped; you didn’t volunteer for the operation that plugged the violinist into your kidneys. Can those who oppose abortion on the ground I mentioned make an exception for a pregnancy due to rape? Certainly. They can say that persons have a right to life only if they didn’t come into existence because of rape; or they can say that all persons have a right to life, but that some have less of a right to life than others, in particular, that those who came into existence because of rape have less. But these statements have a rather unpleasant sound. Surely the question of whether you have a right to life at all, or how much of it you have, shouldn’t turn on the question of whether or not you are the product of a rape. And in fact the people who oppose abortion on the ground I mentioned do not make this distinction, and hence do not make an exception in case of rape. 50 Philosophy ; Public Affairs Nor do they make an exception for a case in which the mother has to spend the nine months of her pregnancy in bed. They would agree that would be a great pity, and hard on the mother; but all the same, all persons have a right to ife, the fetus is a person, and so on. I suspect, in fact, that they would not make an exception for a case in which, miraculously enough, the pregnancy went on for nine years, or even the rest of the mother’s life. Some won’t even make an exception for a case in which continuation of the pregnancy is likely to shorten the mother’s life; they regard abortion as impermissible even to save the mother’s life. Such cases are nowadays very rare, and many opponents of abortion do not accept this extreme view. Moreover, in killing the child, one would be killing an innocent person, for the child has committed no crime, and is not aiming at his mother’s death. And then there are a variety of ways in which this 3. The term â€Å"direct† in the arguments I refer to is a technical one. Roughly, what is meant by â€Å"direct killing† is either killing as an end in itself, or killing as a means to some end, for example, the end of saving someone else’s life. See note 6, below, for an example of its use. 51 A Defense of Abortion might be continued. i) But as directly killing an innocent person is always and absolutely impermissible, an abortion may not be performed. Or, (2) as directly killing an innocent person is murder, and murder is always and absolutely impermissible, an abortion may not be performed. Because unplugging you would be directly killing an innocent violinist, and that’s murder, and that’s impermissible. † If anything in the world is true, it is that you do not commit murder, you do not do what is impermissible, if you reach around to your back and unplug yourself from that violinist to save your life. The main focus of attention in writings on abortion has been on what a third party may or may not do in answer to a request from a woman for an abortion. This is in a way understandable. Things being as they are, there isn’t much a woman can safely do to abort herself. So the question asked is what a third party may do, and what the mother may do, if it is mentioned at all, is deduced, almost as an afterthought, from what it is concluded that third parties may do. But it seems to me that to treat the matter in this way is to refuse to grant to the mother that very status of person which is so firmly insisted on for the fetus. For we cannot simply read off what a person may do from what a third party may do. Suppose you find yourself trapped in a tiny house with a growing child. I mean a very tiny house, and a rapidly growing child-you are already up against the wall f the house and in a few minutes you’ll be crushed to death. The child on the other hand won’t be crushed to death; if nothing is done to stop him from growing he’ll be hurt, but in the end he’ll simply burst open the house and walk out a free man. Now I could well understand it if a bystander were to say, â€Å"There’s nothing we can do for you. We c annot choose between your life and his, we cannot be the ones to decide who is to live, we cannot intervene. † But it cannot be concluded that you too can do nothing, that you cannot attack it to save your life. However innocent the child may be, you do not have to wait passively while it crushes you to death. Perhaps a pregnant woman is vaguely felt to have the status of house, to which we don’t allow the 53 A Defense of Abortion right of self-defense. But if the woman houses the child, it should be remembered that she is a person who houses it. 1 should perhaps stop to say explicitly that I am not claiming that people have a right to do anything whatever to save their lives. I think, rather, that there are drastic limits to the right of self-defense. If someone threatens you with death unless you torture someone else to death, I think you have not the right, even to save your life, to do so. But the case under consideration here is very different. In our case there are only two people involved, one whose life is threatened, and one who threatens it. Both are innocent: the one who is threatened is not threatened because of any fault, the one who threatens does not threaten because of any fault. For this reason we may feel that we bystanders cannot intervene. But the person threatened can. In sum, a woman surely can defend her life against the threat to it posed by the unborn child, even if doing so involves its death. And this shows not merely that the theses in (i) through (4) are false; it shows also that the extreme view of abortion is false, and so we need not canvass any other possible ways of arriving at it from the argument I mentioned at the outset. 2. The extreme view could of course be weakened to say that while abortion is permissible to save the mother’s life, it may not be performed by a third party, but only by the mother herself. But this cannot be right either. For what we have to keep in mind is that the mother and the unborn child are not like two tenants in a small house which has, by an unfortunate mistake, been rented to both: the mother owns the house. The fact that she does adds to the offensiveness of deducing that the mother can do nothing from the supposition that third parties can do nothing. But it does more than this: it casts a bright light on the supposition that third parties can do nothing. Certainly it lets us see that a third party who says â€Å"I cannot choose between you† is fooling himself if he thinks this is impartiality. If Jones has found and fastened on a certain coat, which he needs to keep him from freezing, but which Smith also needs to keep him from freezing, then it is not impartiality that says â€Å"I cannot choose between you† when Smith owns the coat. Women have said again and again â€Å"This body is my body! † and they have reason to feel angry, reason to feel that it has been like shouting into the wind. Smith, after all, is 54 Philosophy & Public Affairs hardly likely to bless us if we say to him, â€Å"Of course it’s your coat, anybody would grant that it is. But no one may choose between you and Jones who is to have it.We should really ask what it is that says â€Å"no one may choose† in the face of the fact that the body that houses the child is the mother’s body. It may be simply a failure to appreciate this fact. But it may be something more interesting, namely the sense that one has a right to refuse to lay hands on people, even where it would be just and fair to do so, even where justice seems to require that somebody do so. Thus justice might call for somebody to get Smith’s coat back from Jones, and yet you have a right to refuse to be the one to lay hands on Jones, a right to refuse to do physical violence to him. This, I think, must be granted. But then what should be said is not â€Å"no one may choose,† but only â€Å"I cannot choose,† and indeed not even this, but â€Å"I will not act,† leaving it open that somebody else can or should, and in particular that anyone in a position of authority, with the job of securing people’s rights, both can and should. So this is no difficulty. I have not been arguing that any given third party must accede to the mother’s request that he perform an abortion to save her life, but only that he may. I suppose that in some views of human life the mother’s body is only on loan to her, the loan not being one which gives her any prior claim to it. One who held this view might well think it impartiality to say â€Å"I cannot choose. † But I shall simply ignore this possibility. My own view is that if a human being has any just, prior claim to anything at all, he has a just, prior claim to his own body. And perhaps this needn’t be argued for here anyway, since, as I mentioned, the arguments against abortion we are looking at do grant that the woman has a right to decide what happens in and to her body. But although they do grant it, I have tried to show that they do not take seriously what is done in granting it. I suggest the same thing will reappear even more clearly when we turn away from cases in which the mother’s life is at stake, and attend, as I propose we now do, to the vastly more common cases in which a woman wants an abortion for some less weighty reason than preserving her own life. 3. Where the mother’s life is not at stake, the argument I mentioned at the outset seems to have a much stronger pull. â€Å"Everyone 55 A Defense of Abortion as a right to life, so the unborn person has a right to life. † And isn’t the child’s right to life weightier than anything other than the mother’s own right to life, which she might put forward as ground for an abortion? This argument treats the right to life as if it were unproblematic. It is not, and this seems to me to be precisely the source of the mistake. For we should now, at long last , ask what it comes to, to have a right to life. In some views having a right to life includes having a right to be given at least the bare minimum one needs for continued life. But suppose that what in fact is the bare minimum a man needs for continued life is something he has no right at all to be given? If I am sick unto death, and the only thing that will save my life is the touch of Henry Fonda’s cool hand on my fevered brow, then all the same, I have no right to be given the touch of Henry Fonda’s cool hand on my fevered brow. It would be frightfully nice of him to fly in from the West Coast to provide it. It would be less nice, though no doubt well meant, if my friends flew out to the West Coast and carried Henry Fonda back with them. But I have no right at all against anybody that he should do this for me. Or again, to return to the story I told earlier, the fact that for continued life that violinist needs the continued use of your kidneys does not establish that he has a right to be given the continued use of your kidneys. He certainly has no right against you that you should give him continued use of your kidneys. For nobody has any right to use your kidneys unless you give him such a right; and nobody has the right against you that you shall give him this right-if you do allow him to go on using your kidneys, this is a kindness on your part, and not something he can claim from you as his due. Nor has he any right against anybody else that they should give him continued use of your kidneys. Certainly he had no right against the Society of Music Lovers that they should plug him into you in the first place. And if you now start to unplug yourself, having learned that you will otherwise have to spend nine years in bed with him, there is nobody in the world who must try to prevent you, in order to see to it that he is given something he has a right to be given. Some people are rather stricter about the right to life. In their view, it does not include the right to be given anything, but amounts to, 56 Philosophy & Public Affairs and only to, the right not to be killed by anybody. But here a related difficulty arises. If everybody is to refrain from killing that violinist, then everybody must refrain from doing a great many different sorts of things. Everybody must refrain from slitting his throat, everybody must refrain from shooting him-and everybody must refrain from unplugging you from him. But does he have a right against everybody that they shall refrain from unplugging you from him? To refrain from doing this is to allow him to continue to use your kidneys. It could be argued that he has a right against us that we should allow him to continue to use your kidneys. That is, while he had no right against us that we should give him the use of your kidneys, it might be argued that he anyway has a right against us that we shall not now intervene and deprive him of the use of your kidneys. I shall come back to third-party interventions later. But certainly the violinist has no right against you that you shall allow him to continue to use your kidneys. As I said, if you do allow him to use them, it is a kindness on your part, and not something you owe him. The difficulty I point to here is not peculiar to the right to life. It reappears in connection with all the other natural rights; and it is something which an adequate account of rights must deal with. For present purposes it is enough just to draw attention to it. But I would stress that I am not arguing that people do not have a right to lifequite to the contrary, it seems to me that the primary control we must place on the acceptability of an account of rights is that it should turn out in that account to be a truth that all persons have a right to life. I am arguing only that having a right to life does not guarantee having either a right to be given the use of or a right to be allowed continued use of another person’s body-even if one needs it for life itself. So the right to life will not serve the opponents of abortion in the very simple and clear way in which they seem to have thought it would. 4. There is another way to bring out the difficulty. In the most ordinary sort of case, to deprive someone of what he has a right to is to treat him unjustly. Suppose a boy and his small brother are jointly given a box of chocolates for Christmas. If the older boy takes the box and refuses to give his brother any of the chocolates, he is unjust to -him, for the brother has been given a right to half of them. But 57 A Defense of Abortion uppose that, having learned that otherwise it means nine years in bed with that violinist, you unplug yourself from him. You surely are not being unjust to him, for you gave him no right to use your kidneys, and no one else can have given him any such right. But we have to notice that in unplugging yourself, you are killing him; and violinists, like everybody else, have a right to life, and thus in the view we wer e considering just now, the right not to be killed. So here you do what he supposedly has a right you shall not do, but you do not act unjustly to him in doing it. The emendation which may be made at this point is this: the right to life consists not in the right not to be killed, but rather in the right not to be killed unjustly. This runs a risk of circularity, but never mind: it would enable us to square the fact that the violinist has a right to life with the fact that you do not act unjustly toward him in unplugging yourself, thereby killing him. For if you do not kill him unjustly, you do not violate his right to life, and so it is no wonder you do him no injustice. But if this emendation is accepted, the gap in the argument against abortion stares us plainly in the face: it is by no means enough to show that the fetus is a person, and to remind us that all persons have a right to life-we need to be shown also that killing the fetus violates its right to life, i. e. , that abortion is unjust killing. And is it? I suppose we may take it as a datum that in a case of pregnancy due to rape the mother has not given the unborn person a right to the use of her body for food and shelter. Indeed, in what pregnancy could it be supposed that the mother has given the unborn person such a right? It is not as if there were unborn persons drifting about the world, to whom a woman who wants a child says â€Å"I invite you in. † But it might be argued that there are other ways one can have acquired a right to the use of another person’s body than by having been invited to use it by that person. Suppose a woman voluntarily indulges in intercourse, knowing of the chance it will issue in pregnancy, and then she does become pregnant; is she not in part responsible for the presence, in fact the very existence, of the unborn person inside her? No doubt she did not invite it in. But doesn’t her partial responsibility for its being there itself give it a right to the use of her 58 Philosophy ; Public Affairs body? 7 If so, then her aborting it would be more like the boy’s taking away the chocolates, and less like your unplugging yourself from the violinist-doing so would be depriving it of what it does have a right to, and thus would be doing it an injustice. And then, too, it might be asked whether or not she can kill it even to save her own life: If she voluntarily called it into existence, how can she now kill it, even in self-defense? The first thing to be said about this is that it is something new. Opponents of abortion have been so concerned to make out the independence of the fetus, in order to establish that it has a right to life, just as its mother does, that they have tended to overlook the possible support they might gain from making out that the fetus is dependent on the mother, in order to establish that she has a special kind of responsibility for it, a responsibility that gives it rights against her which are not possessed by any independent person-such as an ailing violinist who is a stranger to her. On the other hand, this argument would give the unborn person a right to its mother’s body only if her pregnancy resulted from a voluntary act, undertaken in full knowledge of the chance a pregnancy might result from it. It would leave out entirely the unborn person whose existence is due to rape. Pending the availability of some further argument, then, we would be left with the conclusion that unborn persons whose existence is due to rape have no right to the use of their mothers’ bodies, and thus that aborting them is not depriving them of anything they have a right to and hence is not unjust killing. And we should also notice that it is not at all plain that this argument really does go even as far as it purports to. For there are cases and cases, and the details make a difference. If the room is stuffy, and I therefore open a window to air it, and a burglar climbs in, it would be absurd to say,†Ah, now he can stay, she’s given him a right to the use of her house-for she is partially responsible for his presence there, having voluntarily done what enabled him to get in, in full knowledge that there are such things as burglars, and that burglars 7. The need for a discussion of this argument was brought home to me by members of the Society for Ethical and Legal Philosophy, to whom this paper was originally presented. 59 A Defense of Abortion burgle. † It would be still more absurd to say this if I had had bars installed outside my windows, precisely to prevent burglars from getting in, and a burglar got in only because of a defect in the bars. It remains equally absurd if we imagine it is not a burglar who climbs in, but an innocent person who blunders or falls in. Again, suppose it were like this: people-seeds drift about in the air like pollen, and if you open your windows, one may drift in and take root in your carpets or upholstery. You don’t want children, so you fix up your windows with fine mesh screens, the very best you can buy. As can happen, however, and on very, very rare occasions does happen, one of the screens is defective; and a seed drifts in and takes root. Does the person-plant who now develops have a right to the use of your house? Surely not-despite the fact that you voluntarily opened your windows, you knowingly kept carpets and upholstered furniture, and you knew that screens were sometimes defective. Someone may argue that you are responsible for its rooting, that it does have a right to your house, because after all you could have lived out your life with bare floors and furniture, or with sealed windows and doors. But this won’t do-for by the same token anyone can avoid a pregnancy due to rape by having a hysterectomy, or anyway by never leaving home without a (reliable!army. It seems to me that the argument we are looking at can establish at most that there are some cases in which the unborn person has a right to the use of its mother’s body, and therefore some cases in which abortion is unjust killing. There is room for much discussion and argument as to precisely which, if any. But I think we should sidestep this issue and leave it open, for at any rate the argument certainly does not est ablish that all abortion is unjust killing. 5. There is room for yet another argument here, however. We surely must all grant that there may be cases in which it would be morally indecent to detach a person from your body at the cost of his life. Suppose you learn that what the violinist needs is not nine years of your life, but only one hour: all you need do to save his life is to spend one hour in that bed with him. Suppose also that letting him use your kidneys for that one hour would not affect your health in the slightest. Admittedly you were kidnapped. Admittedly you did not give 6o Philosophy & Public Affairs anyone permission to plug him into you. Nevertheless it seems to me plain you ought to allow him to use your kidneys for that hour-it would be indecent to refuse. Again, suppose pregnancy lasted only an hour, and constituted no threat to life or health. And suppose that a woman becomes pregnant as a result of rape. Admittedly she did not voluntarily do anything to bring about the existence of a child. Admittedly she did nothing at all which would give the unborn person a right to the use of her body. All the same it might well be said, as in the newly emended violinist story, that she ought to allow it to remain for that hour-that it would be indecent in her to refuse. Now some people are inclined to use the term â€Å"right†in such a way that it follows from the fact that you ought to allow a person to use your body for the hour he needs, that he has a right to use your body for the hour he needs, even though he has not been given that right by any person or act. They may say that it follows also that if you refuse, you act unjustly toward him. This use of the term is perhaps so common that it cannot be called wrong; nevertheless it seems to me to be an unfortunate loosening of what we would do better to keep a tight rein on. Suppose that box of chocolates I mentioned earlier had not been given to both boys jointly, but was given only to the older boy. There he sits, stolidly eating his way through the box, his small brother watching enviously. Here we are likely to say â€Å"Youought not to be so mean. You ought to give your brother some of those chocolates. † My own view is that it just does not follow from the truth of this that the brother has any right to any of the chocolates. If the boy refuses to give his brother any, he is greedy, stingy, callous-but not unjust. I suppose that the people I have in mind will say it does follow that the brother has a right to some of the chocolates, and thus that the boy does act unjustly if he refuses to give his brother any. But the effect of saying this is to obscure what we should keep distinct, namely the difference between the boy’s refusal in this case and the boy’s refusal in the earlier case, in which the box was given to both boys jointly, and in which the small brother thus had what was from any point of view clear title to half. A further objection to so using the term â€Å"right†that from the fact that A ought to do a thing for B, it follows that B has a right against A 6I A Defense of Abortion that A do it for him, is that it is going to make the question of whether or not a man has a right to a thing turn on how easy it is to provide him with it; and this seems not merely unfortunate, but morally unacceptable. Take the case of Henry Fonda again. I said earlier that I had no right to the touch of his cool hand on my fevered brow, even though I needed it to save my life. I said it would be frightfully nice of him to fly in from the West Coast to provide me with it, but that I had no right against him that he should do so. But suppose he isn’t on the West Coast. Suppose he has only to walk across the room, place a hand briefly on my brow-and lo, my life is saved. Then surely he ought to do it, it would be indecent to refuse. Is it to be said â€Å"Ah, well, it follows that in this case she has a right to the touch of his hand on her brow, and so it would be an injustice in him to refuse†? So that I have a right to it when it is easy for him to provide it, though no right when it’s hard? It’s rather a shocking idea that anyone’s rights should fade away and disappear as it gets harder and harder to accord them to him. So my own view is that even though you ought to let the violinist use your kidneys for the one hour he needs, we should not conclude that he has a right to do so-we should say that if you refuse, you are, like the boy who owns all the chocolates and will give none away, self-centered and callous, indecent in fact, but not unjust. And similarly, that even supposing a case in which a woman pregnant due to rape ought to allow the unborn person to use her body for the hour he needs, we should not conclude that he has a right to do so; we should conclude that she is self-centered, callous, indecent, but not unjust, if she refuses. The complaints are no less grave; they are just different. However, there is no need to insist on this point. If anyone does wish to deduce â€Å"he has a ight† from â€Å"you ought,† then all the same he must surely grant that there are cases in which it is not morally required of you that you allow that violinist to use your kidneys, and in which he does not have a right to use them, and in which you do not do him an injustice if you refuse. And so also for mother and unborn child. Except in such cases as the unborn person has a right to demand it-and we were leaving open the possibility that there may be such cases-nobody is morally required to make large sacrifices, of health, of all other interests and concerns, of all other duties 62 Philosophy & Public Affairs and commitments, for nine years, or even for nine months, in order to keep another person alive. 6. We have in fact to distinguish between two kinds of Samaritan: the Good Samaritan and what we might call the Minimally Decent Samaritan. The story of the Good Samaritan, you will remember, goes like this: A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And by chance there came down a certain priest that way; and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was; and when he saw him he had compassion on him. And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow, when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, â€Å"Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.(Luke I0:30-35) The Good Samaritan went out of his way, at some cost to himself, to help one in need of it. We are not told what the options were, that is, whether or not the priest and the Levite could have helped by doing less than the Good Samaritan did, but assuming they could have, then the fact they did nothing at all shows they were not even Minimally Decent Samaritans, not because they were not Samaritans, but because they w ere not even minimally decent. These things are a matter of degree, of course, but there is a difference, and it comes out perhaps most clearly in the story of Kitty Genovese, who, as you will remember, was murdered while thirtyeight people watched or listened, and did nothing at all to help her. A Good Samaritan would have rushed out to give direct assistance 63 A Defense of Abortion against the murderer. Or perhaps we had better allow that it would have been a Splendid Samaritan who did this, on the ground that it would have involved a risk of death for himself. But the thirty-eight not only did not do this, they did not even trouble to pick up a phone to call the police. Minimally Decent Samaritanism would call for doing at least that, and their not having done it was monstrous. After telling the story of the Good Samaritan, Jesus said â€Å"Go, and do thou likewise. † Perhaps he meant that we are morally required to act as the Good Samaritan did. Perhaps he was urging people to do more than is morally required of them. At all events it seems plain that it was not morally required of any of the thirty-eight that he rush out to give direct assistance at the risk of his own life, and that it is not morally required of anyone that he give long stretches of his lifenine years or nine months-to sustaining the life of a person who has no special right (we were leaving open the possibility of this) to demand it. Indeed, with one rather striking class of exceptions, no one in any country in the world is legally required to do anywhere near as much as this for anyone else.