Control Verbs and Verbal Complement

-Data from Kurdish-

Dr.Hoshang Farooq

AbstractThere are two major issues that any analysis of

control needs to address. They include the

specification of the nature of the controlled

predicate and the identification of the controller.

Accordingly, the present paper gives a brief

introduction to the theory of control as proposed

within the framework of Government and Binding

Theory by Chomsky (1981) and then examines some

Kurdish data in the light of the theory. The data

are restricted to showing how control is realized

with the verbal complement predicates in Central

Kurdish (CK). After examination of data on control in

subjunctive complement clauses, control complements and

agreement and control and overt subjects, a number of

conclusions have been drawn including, among

1 | P a g e

others, that subjunctive complements to control

verbs in Kurdish are different from subjunctive

complements to non-control verbs in that their

(missing) subjects must be coreferential with the

main subject, and that Kurdish does not have

control infinitival predicates as English does.

Rather, Kurdish makes use of subjunctives which (in

control theory) are generated as VP complements to

the higher verb, etc.

1. Introduction

There is a range of subject-predicate constructions

in natural languages, where the subject appears to

be missing. Yet it is quite easy to interpret the

missing element correctly either as coreferential

with some other noun phrase (NP) within the same

sentence or as having arbitrary reference (Brown

and Miller, 1999:107). Before moving on to provide

an explanation of control constructions in Kurdish,

a general overview of the phenomenon is in order.

The following discussion is mainly drawn from Brown

2 | P a g e

and Miller (1999). Here are some examples from

English:

1. a. John hoped [to fly].

b. John persuaded Mary [to fly].

c. [To fly] isn’t easy.

In all the three instances, the predicate in

question is the infinitival to fly. In (1.a), the

understood subject of the sentence is John, which is

the matrix subject; in (1b), the understood subject

of the sentence is Mary, which is the matrix

object; and in (1c), the subject of the sentence

has arbitrary reference, that is its referent is

anyone or anything in a given context. Thus, in the

first two examples, the infinitivals with

unexpressed subjects are ‘controlled’ by noun

phrases (NPs) elsewhere in the respective sentences

(they display ‘obligatory’ control) and the third

example displays ‘arbitrary control’. The term

‘control’ can alternatively be used in the sense of

the relation between an unexpressed subject and a

3 | P a g e

controller. The specification of the nature of the

controlled predicate and the identification of the

controller are major issues in any analysis of

control (Cullicover and Jakendoff: 501).

2. Control and raising verbs

The term control verb is sometimes generalized

somewhat to include raising verbs, which are much the

same, except with a noun argument being

semantically an argument only of the verb argument,

not of the raising verb itself (Manzini, 1983:403).

For example, in

He seemed to do that

seemed is a raising verb, where its subject he is

semantically the subject of to do rather than of

seemed. (Note that one could say, "It seemed that

he did that," but not, *"It tried that he did

that." Similarly, one could say, "That seemed to be

done by him," but "That tried to be done by him"

would be syntactically well-formed but would have a

different, nonsensical meaning.)

4 | P a g e

As with many technical terms, both control verb and

raising verb are used somewhat differently in

different papers, partly because different

linguistic theories may group verbs in somewhat

different hierarchies.

3. The Characteristics of Control

Constructions

3.1 Control vs. Noncontrol

The control construction is not the only one

involving a predicate with an apparently missing

object, and it is important to correctly identify

the type in pre-theoretical terms (ibid: 107).

Thus, control sentences like (1a) have to be

distinguished from subject-raising sentences like

(2a) below, and control sentences like (1b) have to

be distinguished from object-raising sentences or

Exceptional Case Marking (ECM) like (2b):

2.a. John appeared to fly.

b. John believed Mary to fly.

5 | P a g e

The (a) sentences in (1) and (2) have in common an

NP-verb-infinitival pattern, and the (b) sentences

have a common NP-V-INF pattern. On inspection,

substantial syntactic and semantic differences

within these patterns occur.

However, where predicates in complement position

are involved, control constructions can be

identified directly by reference to the type of the

main verb. Thus, hope and persuade from the earlier

examples are control verbs. Appear is an example of

subject-raising verb and believe is an example of

object-raising or exceptional case marking verbs

(Brown and Miller, 1999:109).

3.2 Other Types of Predicate with Missing

Subjects

Apart from the infinitivals in complement position

that are subject to control phenomenon in English,

other constructions like participials and verbless

predicates can also be used as controlled

predicates. Consider the following examples:

6 | P a g e

3.John [tried [flying his new kite]]. (participial V-complement)

4.Mary saw [[letters] [written by children]]. (participial NP-adjunct)

5.John [[arrived] [tired]].

(Verbless VP-adjunct)

6.[Writing a letter] was easy for Mary.

(Participial subject)

Yet, finite predicates cannot be controlled as

shown in the examples below:

7.*John was [hoping [might fly]] (Finite V-complement)

8.*[Wrote a letter] was easy for Mary. (Finite subject)

3.3 The Controller

The controller is referred to as an item that

controls another item and triggers the expression

of certain morphological features on a target or

determines the reference of an anaphor (Luraghi and

7 | P a g e

Parodi, 2008:89). In (9) the NP Mary controls the

anaphoric pronoun her:

9.Maryi left and everybody misses heri.

Here the controller is an antecedent and the two

different forms above capture different features of

the phenomenon of control.

The interpretation of unexpected subject is either

associated with some NP within the same sentence or

it is arbitrary. Moreover, subjects and objects can

be controllers depending on the choice of the

control verb. The verb hope in (1a) above is a

‘subject-control’ verb, and the verb ‘persuade’ in

(1b) above is an ‘object-control’ verb. Some verbs,

like ask in English have a dual classification

(Brown and Miller, 1999:108):

10. John asked Mary to fly with him.

11. John asked to fly with Mary.

Turning now to Kurdish, we will encounter the

challenge that Kurdish does not have infinitives

and infinitivals and since these are normally8 | P a g e

represented by subjunctive forms, different

structures will yield:

12. Azad dāwā-y la Kani kird laga^libi-rw-āt. Azad ask-Ezaf from Kani did with-her SUBJ-go-3SG

13. Azad dāwāy kird lagal Kani bi-^rw-āt.Azad ask-Ezaf did with Kani SUBJ-go-3SG

Hence, an acceptable choice would be to opt forsomething like a citation form of the verb which issometimes referred to as “long infinitive” in thelinguistic literature. Consider:

14. Kāni haz da-kāt [namām bi-çên-êt].Kani like DUR-do [small plant SUBJ-plant-3SG]

We note also that, while Central Kurdish (CK) is

considered an SOV language, clausal complements

follow the verb as shown below:

15. Kāni da-y-aw-êt [sêw-aka bi-xwā-t].Kani DUR-3SG-want-3SG [apple-def SUBJ-eat.3SG]

9 | P a g e

4. Control Complement in Kurdish:

4.1 A Preliminary:

Consider the following Kurdish translations of

English control constructions:

(1) a. (min) da-twān- im (ka) [bi-^ro-m] I DUR-be able- 1SG (comp) [SUBJ-go.1SG]

I [can/ am able to] go

b. (min) bi:r- im-ĉu: (ka) [bi-^ro-m] I memory 1SG go-past (comp) [SUBJ-go.1SG]

I forgot to go

c. (min) haw^l-im dā (ka ) [bi-^ro-m] (I) try.1SG give-PAST (comp) [SUBJ-go.1SG]

I tried to go

d. (min) bi-^ryār- im- da (ka ) [bi-^ro-m]

10 | P a g e

( I ) decision 1SG.give=make-PAST (comp) {SUBJ-go.1SG}

I decided to go

e. (min) da-ma-wê (ka ) [bi-^ro-m] ( I ) DUR 1SG want (comp) [SUBJ go

1SG]

In the above sentences the matrix predicates

exhibit various differences between English and

Kurdish such as the following:

1.The English modal auxiliary 'can' in (1a) is a

verb in Kurdish, and the equivalents of the

verbs 'forget', 'try' and 'decide' (i.e.,

bi:rĉu:n, hawi^ldan, biryarda:n) represent

complex predicates and not simple verbs.

2.In the sentences above, we observe that the

English sentences contain embedded infinitival

clauses while the Kurdish equivalents contain

embedded subjunctive clauses.

11 | P a g e

4.2 Control in subjunctive complement clauses

As mentioned earlier, overt subjects are relatively

rare within infinitival clauses in English. Such

overt subjects are restricted to clausal

complements of exceptional case marking verbs,

causative verbs and perception verbs (Wambrand,

1998: 164-5). However, subjunctive clauses in

English often contain overt subjects. Consider the

following examples:

(2) a. da- zān-im (ka) [sibay Azad dêt] DUR know 1SG (comp) [tomorrow Azad DUR-come-3SG] I know that Azad is coming tomorrow.

b. pêmwāya (ka) [sibay Azad dêt] think -I- 1SG (comp) [tomorrow Azad DUR-come-3SG]

I think that Azad is coming tomorrow.

What we observe here is that:

1. In (2a) the matrix verb (dazānim) selects an

indicative complement (dêt) while in 2(b) the

12 | P a g e

matrix verb (pêmwāya) selects a subjunctive

complement (bêt).

2. In both sentences the embedded clause contains

an overt subject which must be case assigned.

3. Accordingly, it can be assumed that the overt

subject in the embedded subjunctive clauses is

assigned nominative case in the same way, i.e. by

virtue of being in the specifier position of the

lower TP.

The point can be reinforced further by the fact

that main verbs in sentences containing modals such

as 'dabêt' (must) and 'lawānaya' (might) are also

subjunctive occurring with overt subjects:

(3) a. Azad dabêt kitêb bi-k^r-êt. Azad must book SUBJ buy 3SG

b. Azad lawānaya zu: bi-nw-êt Azad might early SUBJ sleep 3SG

Moreover, apart from realizing that subjunctive

clauses may occur with overt subjects, Kurdish can

13 | P a g e

be shown not to need such an overt subject since it

is a null-subject language as shown from the

examples below:

(4) a. Azad da^ĺê –t (ka) pro [dêt] Azad DUR- say – 3SG (com) [ DUR-come-3SG]

Azad says (that) he will come

b. Azad da- twân êt (ka) pro [bêt] Azad DUR can 3SG (com) [SUBJ-come-3SG]

These examples demonstrate that in Kurdish the

subjunctive clause need not contain an overt

subject while in English it cannot assume its

status as sentence without an overt subject.

4.3 Control complements and agreement

In the light of the above discussion, we can assume

that when subjectless subjunctive complements have

null pronominal subjects, then it should be

possible for agreement on the embedded verb to be

different from the agreement on the matrix verb.

14 | P a g e

This can be applied to non-control verbs as well.

Consider:

(5) a. Pêmwāya (ka) [bêt]

think- I- 1SG (comp) [SUBJ-come-3SG]

I think he will come

b. Pêm-wit (ka) [bêt]

say-PAST-1SG (comp) [SUBJ-come-3SG]

I told him to come

c. ĉâwarê dakam (ka) [bet]

expect=make-1SG (comp) [SUBJ-come-3SG]

However, control verbs behave differently, and some

of them do not allow the agreement on the embedded

verb to be different:

(6) a. *da-twān-im (ka) [bêt]

DUR-can-1SG (comp) [SUBJ-come-3SG] *I can come him.

b. bi:r-im-ĉu:

(ka) [bêt]

15 | P a g e

memory-1SG-go-PAST-3SG (comp) [SUBJ-come-3SG]

* I forgot him to come.

c. da-m-awêt (ka) [bêt]

DUR-want-1SG (comp) [SUBJ-come-3SG]

I want him to come.

4.4 Control complements and overt subjects

A striking fact in Kurdish is that certain control

verbs select subjunctive complements that can not

contain overt subjects and few others do not:

(7) a. Kani datwānêt ka bêt Kani DUR-can-3SG (comp) [SUBJ-go-3SG] Kani can go.

b. * Kani datwānêt ka [ Azad bêt] Kani DUR-can-3SG (comp) [Azad SUBJ-go-3SG]

*Kani can Azad come

c. Kani hawlidā ka bêt Kani try-give-PAST-3SG (comp) [SUBJ-come-3SG] Kani tried to come.16 | P a g e

d. Kani hawli:dā ka [Azad bêt] Kani try-give-PAST-3SG (comp) [Azad SUBJ-come-3SG]

*Kani tried for Azad to come.

e. Kani dayawêt ka [bi-^rwāt] Kani DUR-want-3SG (comp) [SUBJ-go-3SG] Kani wants to go.

f. Kani dayawêt ka [Azad bi-^rwāt] Kani DUR-want-3SG (comp) [Azad SUBJ-go-3SG]

Kani wants Azad to go.

g. Kani dayawêt ka [aw

bi^rwāt]

Kani DUR-want-3SG (comp) [he SUBJ-go-3SG]

Kani wants him to go.

What is noted from the last example is that a

pronoun can be used to clearly distinguish the

embedded subject from the matrix subject.

17 | P a g e

Hence, the most important conclusion we draw from

this discussion is that subjunctive complements to

control verbs are different from subjunctive

complements to non-control verbs in that their

(missing) subjects must be coreferential with the

subject (as in g).

5. Conclusions

The conclusions drawn from the study can be summed

up as follows:

1.Kurdish does not have control infinitival predicates as

English does. Rather, it makes use of

subjunctives, and control subjunctives are

generated as VP complements to the higher verb.

2.In Kurdish, although subjunctive clauses may

occur with overt subjects, yet the language

does not need such an overt subject. This is

due to the fact that Kurdish is a null-subject

language.

3.When subjectless subjunctive complements in

Kurdish have null pronominal subjects, then it

is possible for the agreement on the embedded18 | P a g e

verb to be different from the agreement on the

matrix verb.

4.Certain control verbs in Kurdish do select

subjunctive complements that cannot contain

overt subjects while a few others do not.

5.Subjunctive complements to control verbs in

Kurdish are different from subjunctive

complements to non-control verbs in that their

(missing) subjects must be coreferential with

the main subject.

Bibliography

Borsley, Robert (1999). Syntactic Theory: A Unified

Approach. Arnold. London

Bresnan, J. (1982). Control and

complementation. In J. Bresnan (ed.), The mental

representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA:

MIT Press.

Culicover, Peter (1997). Principles and Parameters.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

19 | P a g e

Culicover, Peter and Ray Jackendoff (2001).

Control is not movement. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 493–

512.

Hornstein, N. (1997). Control in GB and Minimalism.

Glot International, 2(8) (reprinted in Cheng

and R. Sybesma (eds.), The first glot

international state-of-the-article book (2000).

Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hornstein, Norbert (1999). Control and

Movement. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 69–96.

Hornstein, Norbert (2003). On control. In R.

Hendrick (ed.), Minimalist Syntax. Oxford:

Blackwell, 6–81.

Hornstein, Norbert and Kleanthes K. Grohmann

(2006). Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Jaworska, E. (1999). Control. In K.Brown and

J.Miller (ed.), Concise Encyclopedia of Grammatical

Categories. Elsevier Science Ltd.

Luraghi, Silvia and Claudia Parodi (2008). Key

Terms in Syntax and Syntactic Theory. Continuum.

20 | P a g e

Manzini, M. R. (1983). On control and control

theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 421– 46.

Mihemed, Hatam Wilya (2009). The Structural Relations

of Syntactic Representations. PhD Dissertation.

Mukiryany Establishment for Research and

Publishing.(In Kurdish).

Qadir, Sabah Rasheed (2009). Some Aspects of

Government and Binding Theory in Kurdish. PhD

Dissertation. Arbil. Kurdish Academy. (In

Kurdish).

Radford, Andrew (1997). Syntax: A Minimalist

Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wurmbrand, S. (1998). Infinitives. PhD

dissertation, Cambridge, MA: MIT.

21 | P a g e

ة� ت� وخ�� ث��ل� ) ت�رؤ� ن��� ري� ك�و� ؤ� ي�� ي� ت�� ارة� ت� ل�ة� ب��� وخ�� ك�ي� ث��� ة� ن��� ة� ة� ل�ة� ك�ورن�� ت�� ت� ة� ب��ري�� ن��� ؤة� ة� ت� ت*� ذ� وب��َ م ث�� ة� ( ل�ة�Control Theoryن���

ي� ) ؤة� ة� ت� ت� س��� ة� لَات� ؤ ن�� س��ة� ري� دة� ؤ� ي��� ي�� ت�� ؤة� َ ي� وارض���� م�س��كي� )GBض�� و� ة� ؤ1981( ض�� مؤن���� ذ ن�� ب�� ة� ي� ض��� ؤة� ة� كردن�� ي� ( ش����Fن ت�� ة� ت��� I*ت ا وردي� ب�� �ي� ك��� Jن ا م��� �ي� ر� Jك�ان ة� مؤؤن���� اؤ ن�� �J��داب . ة� ت��� IPت ر ؤ� ي� م ت�� ة� ي� ن�� �Jن ا ي� ش�� ر ِرؤ� ب��َ راش�ت� لة� د� اؤة� ي� ب�� ن*� �ي� ك�ورد Jن م�ا ك�ي� ر� ة� ان�� �Jداب

دا. ة� م�ان�� ؤ ر� نF لة� دة� انF دة� س� ي� ل� ي�� ت�رؤ� ن�� ي� ك�و� اردة� �Jي� دب ة� ان�� ي� IPت ة� ك�ردار ت� IPت ؤاؤك�ار ة� ارة� ن�� ؤ ط�ؤر� ة� ن��

ؤة� ) ة� ك�ردن���� رر� ة� �ي� ن�� Jن ا ك��� ل ؤ ك�ردارة� ت�رؤ� ن���� ة� ك�و� ؤان���� ، لة� وؤة� كه��اث�� َ ي� Yت� Zك ي�َ ش���� ة� ذ ن�� ب�� ة� ة� ل��ة� ض��� ك��� ؤة� ة� ت� ت*� ذ� وب��َ (،raisingث��

�ي� Jذان اب�� س����� ي� ل ؤ ي�� ت�رؤ� ن�� اك�و� ة� ب������ ل ن������ ت�رؤ� ن������ �ي� ك�و� ن� راؤردك�رد ة� ش� ن������ ة� ؤان������ ل لة� ت�رؤ� ن������ �ي� ك�و� Jك�ان ة� �J����كهان َ ي� Yي� ت�� Jن ك�ا ة� ت����� IPت ذ ب�� مة� ن�� ة� ت� I*ت ا ب��

�ي� Jن ا م�� ل ل�ة� ر� ت�رؤ� ن��� ري� ك�و� ة� ؤاؤك�� ة� ر، ن�� ل�ك�ة� ت�رؤ� ن�� ، ك�و� َت� ي� bت� ذا ؤنF دة� اب��� اب�� ي� ر ت�� ك�ة� ة� ب�� كة� ك�� ب�� ي� د ارة� ري� ط�ؤر� ؤ� ذي�َ ج�� ب�� هة�ذا ) ي���������� Iت� ة� مان�� ن*� ري� ط�ر ة� ؤاؤك���������� ة� ي� ن�� ة� ت� ل� ل���������ة� رش���������� ت�رؤ� ن����������� ذا، ك�و� ي� راش���������� اؤة� ي� ب�� ن*� ورد Subjunctiveك����������

Complement Clausesري� ة� ؤاؤك������� ة� ه�ا ن�� رؤة� ، ه������ة� Fن ؤت�� كك������ة� ل ؤ رب��َ ت�رؤ� ن�������� ري�� ك�و� ة� ؤاؤك������� ة� (، ن��

ي� َ ي� ة� ت�� ِرؤؤ ك��� ة� ن�� ؤ� س��ي� م�انF خ�� ة� ام�ان���� ج� ن�� ة� رن�� ؤ دة� ة� م ن���� ة� رج� ذا س��ة� س���� ك�ة� ؤة� ة� ت� ت� ل�َ كؤ� َ ي� ل�ي� �Jن ا �J��ب كرا. ل��ة� ك�و� اس���� ري� ب�� ك��ة� ل ؤ ب�� ت�رؤ� ن���� ك�و�

. وؤة� رط�رث�� ؤة� َ ك�ردؤؤة� ك�ة� س�وؤدم�انF ل�ي� ب��ر� م�انF ر ة� اؤان�� رض�� ؤ سة� ة� ري��ش� ن�� ت��نF ؤ دؤاب�� ؤؤ ي� ي��س� ط�ة�22 | P a g e

رداري� �ي� ك���� Jك�ان ة� ت���� Iت� ة� مان�� ن*� رة� ط�ر ة� ؤاؤك���� ة� ي� ن�� ؤة� نF ل���ة� ي� ي� نF ب��رت����� ت�� ؤ ي� ي��س���� طة� ي� َ Iت Yي� ي� ة� طان����� �Jام���ة� ط�رن ج� ن�� رة� ؤ دة� كZ ل���ة� َ�Jذي ب����� هة�

ة� ؤي��س��ت� َ ي� Yة� ت� دا ك��� ؤة� ل ل��ة� ت�رؤ� ن�� اك�و� رداري� ب���� ي� ك��� ن�� ة� مان���� ن*� ري� ط�ر ة� ؤاؤك��� ة� نF ل��ة� ن�� اؤار� ي��� ذا خ�� �J��ي� ك�وردب� Jن ا م��� ل ل��ة� ر� ت�رؤ� ن���� ك�و�

ؤ ة� وردي� ن����� �ي� ك���� Jن ا م���� ه�ا ر� رؤة� ، ه���ة� َت� ي� bة�� ت� اد� ام���� ذا ه�اؤب�� ي� Iك�ت رة� ري� س���ة� ك���ة� َل ب�� ة� ط���� ( لة� ؤؤة� ي���� كي� ؤؤت�� َI*ب ر ك���ة� ة� ب�� ر )ك���� ك���ة� ب��ي� ) ة� ان�� اؤط�ي� ارة� ض����������� ؤر� infinitiveط���������� predicates�ذا ل���������� ت�رؤ� ن�� َل ك�و� ة� ط���������� ة� لة� ة� ك���������� ت���������� ( ت��

ي� ) ن�� ة� مان����� ن*� ري� ط�ر ة� ؤاؤك���� ة� كؤ ن�� ل�َ ة� ، ن����� ة� ن����� ذا هة� ب���*� ر� طلت� ي� ت� �ي� ي�� Jن ا م���� و ل���ة� ر� ك���� نF ؤة� ت��َ ت�ر َ هي� ك�ارب�� ة� (subjunctiveن����� ذ. َت� ؤ ه�ي� ي� ت� َ ه�ي� ك�اردة� ة� ن��

لص ج� ال�مست�

طرة� )ه ة� ال�س�ي� ن��� ر ط� ة� ل�ي� ر� وج�� ذم�ة� م�� ارة� ع�نF م�ق� حت� ع�ي� ا ال�ب� ذرجControl TheoryFذ� ي�� ي� ت�� ي� ( ال��ط ) جكم ؤ ال�رن����� ة� ال�ب� ن����� ر ط� ار ن�� منF اط���� (Government and Bindingض����� ؤم�س���كي� ( ل )ج��

. ك�ورة� ة� ال�مذ� ن�� ر ط� وء ال�ي� ي� ض�� ة� ال�وس�طي( ف� ة� )ال�لهج� ة� ال�كردن�� ات� م�نF ال�لغ� اب�� ي� bؤ ت� Fج ماد� ل ن�� جلي� ها م�جاؤلة� ل�ب� لي� ب��23 | P a g e

اه�رة� ح ط���� وض�� ي� ث�� ذة� ال�ي� ة� ال�مسي� علت� كملات� ال�ف� ص ال�ي� خ� ة� ن�� ة� ال�كردن�� اة� م�نF ال�لغ� ق� ات� ال�مست� اب�� ي� bؤ ال�ت Fج ال�ن�ماد�ة� ال�وس�طي. ي� ال�كؤردن�� طرة� ف� ال�سي�

ه�����ا اخ�ت� م�ي� ذة� م�ي������ حت� م�نF ع������ ك�����ؤنF ال�ب� ي� عت�� ع�����ال ال�رف�� طرة� ؤ اف�� (،Raising Verbs )ال�س�����ي�ري ذات� الاج��� عص� ال�مس��ي� انF ب�� ي��� bطرة� ؤ ت� ي� ال�لاش�� طرة� ب�� ة� ال�س��ي� ارن���� ها م�ق� مي� طرة� م�نF ض��� ي ال�س�ي� ي� ص ت�� صان�� خ��

ها ي� ؤدا ف�� ف������ ل م�ف� اع������ ك�����ؤنF ال�ق� ي� ب�� ي� طر، ال������ طي، ال�مس�����ي� ة� ال�وس������ ي� ال�كردن������� طرة� ف� كمل�����ة� ال�س�����ي� ي�، ب�� طرة� ف� ال�س�����ي�

ة� ت� ت�راض������ ة� الاف� لت����� كمي� ارات� ال�ي� ق��، ال�عي����� ؤاف����� طرة� ؤ ال�ي� كمل����ة� ال�س����ي� را� ب�� ت� ل ؤ اج����� اع����� طرة� ؤ ال�ق� كمل����ة� ال�س����ي� ب��

ح �Jال�صرن .

ة�� ) ت� ت�راض���� ها هي� انF ال�مكملات� الاف� حت� ال�ي� وض�ل ال�ب� ي� ث�� حF ال�ي� �Jان ي� Subjunctiveؤ م�نF اه�م ال�ت�

Complements( طرة� ي� ع�ال ال�لاش�� ه�ا لاف�� لاب�� ي� ل�ف� ع�نF م�ت� ت� ح� ة� ن�� ة� ال�كردن��� ي� ال�لغ�� طرة� ف� عال ال�سي� ( لاف��Noncontrol VerbsZت�رك� ك��ؤنF م�ش��� ؤد( ب�� ف��� ؤ م�ف� اع�ل )ؤه��� ي� انF ال�ق� لاف� ف� ت� كمنF الاخ�� ( ؤ ب��

ؤي� ع�لي حي������ ة� لا ن�� ة� ال�كردن������� ري هي� انF ال�لغ������ اجF اج������� ي� ت� ي� ط�����ة� اش������ ق� . ؤ ب�� س�����ي� ي� ل ال�ري�� اع������ ع ال�ق� ارة� م������ الاس�������

24 | P a g e

ة� ) ذات� ال�مص���ذرن�� ؤInfinitive Predicatesال�مس���ي� طرة� ك�م���ا ه���� ق� ال�س���ي� راف���� ي� ب�� ي� ( ال����ل ل�ها. �Jذي ة�� ك�ي� ت� ت�راض�� ذم ال�مكملات� الاف� ج� ست� ما ي�� ة� ؤ ان�� ن�� ر� كلت� ة� الان�� ي� ال�لغ� ال�جال ف�

25 | P a g e