Re: Odd construct

--- Andrew Chaney wrote:
> If I say spomething along the lines of "There are butterflies", what is
> the subject of the sentence?  I've heard it has none.  How does this
> work?
I've always read that (and phrases like it) as an inversion of "Butterflies
are there".  Likewise "There's a book on the table" -> "A book is there on
the table".
--- end of quote ---

This doesn't always work, though. "There is a butterfly here on the table" is fine,
but *"A butterfly is there here on the table" is awful. The "there" which
introduces existential constructions is clearly different from the "there"
which means "to/at that place".

The problem with existential constructions is that the normal properties
associated with subjects seem to be split between two entities, the "there"
(known in the literature as an 'expletive' or 'dummy' element) and the
indefinite noun phrase following the verb "be" (known as the 'associate' of the
expletive). The associate triggers agreement ("is/was" vs. "are/were"), while
the expletive occupies the normal position for subjects (before the auxiliary
in statements, and immediately after the auxiliary in questions). There doesn't
seem to be any straightforward solution to this dilemma, as far as identifying
which element--the expletive or the associate--is the 'real' subject. Different
linguistics theories opt for different solutions.

Matt.

Matt Pearson
Department of Linguistics
Reed College
3203 SE Woodstock Blvd
Portland, OR 97202 USA
ph:  503-771-1112 (x 7618)

Reply