V a l e n c y / T r a n s i t i v i t y

(1) There are several interpretations of valency two of which are outlined below:

(i) The maximal number of obligatory elements a verb requires to complete its meaning(s) can be referred to as the valency of the verb. Valency can now be considered as an umbrella term, which covers the scrutiny of all the possibilities of linking at various levels, as there is no single valency theory at the moment. Some linguists attribute valency to verbs only whereas others regard valency to be the linking ability of any linguistic element and speak of the valency of all word classes, especially of adjectives and nouns. Verb valency can be defined as the general and specific, variable linking ability of the verb, through which it can get into, often mutual, dependency relations with other linguistic elements. Valency can be described in both quantitative and qualitative terms at the morphosyntactic, logico-semantic as well as pragmatic or communicative level. Using valency features as classifying criteria, verbs can enter into valency classes and form valency patterns. (Budai 1997:xvii—xviii)

(ii) Valency is the grammatical characteristic which gives the number of arguments1 for which a particular verb subcategorises (Trask 1999b:[296]). See 2.1-2.4 in Table 1.

(2) Transitivity is a category in the grammatical analysis of clause/sentence constructions, with particular reference to the verb’s relationship to dependent elements of structure (Crystal 1990:316). See 2A-2E in Table 1. This category is a traditional dichotomy of verbs so they can be categorised as intransitive and/or transitive (Budai 1997:xvii).From a practical point of view intransitivity/transitivity is traditionally signalled in dictionaries. On the other hand more and more dictionaries attempt to display a systematic indication of the linking elements of a verb.

1 An argument is a noun phrase bearing a specific grammatical or semantic relation to a verb and whose overt or implied presence is required for well-formedness in structures containing that verb. Arguments may be identified either in terms of grammatical relations (subject, direct object etc.) or in terms of semantic roles (agent, patient etc.). (Trask 1999b:20)

Table 2 Valency and transitive verbs

Valency Examples Transitivity2.1 Avalent/ambient

verbs: there are no arguments connected to the verb.

rain, snow

Intransitive verbs have a subject and no object.

2A

2.2 Monovalent/univalent verbs have only one argument.

die, smileeat, under-stand, kill, paint

Labile2 verbs/absolute transitive verbs: an intrinsically transitive verb occurs with no overt direct object, the subject of the verb interpreted as an agent and the construction being interpreted as active (Trask 1999b:3)

2B

2.3 Divalent verbs have two arguments.

describe, assassinate, destroy

eat, under-stand, kill, paint

Monotransitive verbs have a direct object which isthe second obligatoryargument of a verb, most typically expressing a patient which undergoes the action of the verb.

2C

2.4 Trivalent verbs have three arguments.

think sy sg, paint sg sg (SVOCo), put sg swhere (SVOA)

Complex transitive verbs require clause types SVOCo

3 and SVOA4 (Quirk et al. 1991:54, McArthur 1992:1051), SVOdPo

5 and SVOdA6 (Biber 1999:381).

2D

give, show Ditransitive verbs have two objects, namely a direct object and an indirect object denoting the entity which is the recipient or beneficiary of the action of the verb.

2E

Notes (Trask 1999b:[296])

(Trask 1999a:322-3)

2 /ˈleɪbaɪl/3 Subject+Verb+[direct] Object+Object Complement4 Subject+Verb+[direct] Object+Adverbial5 Subject+Verb+Direct Object+Object Predicative (noun phrase or adjective)6 Subject+Verb+Direct Object+Adverbial

Sources

Biber et al. 1999Biber, Douglas et al. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow : Longman : [Pearson Education Limited], 1999. xxviii, 1204 p. : ill. ; 24.8 cm ISBN 0-582-23725-4

Budai 1997Budai, László. Morphosyntactic valency classes of English verbs. Veszprém : Veszprémi Egyetemi Kiadó, 1997. xlviii, 483 p. ; 24.2 cm ISBN 963-7332-67-7

Crystal 1990Crystal, David. A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. 2nd edition, reprinted. Oxford (UK) ; Cambridge (Massachusetts) : Basil Blackwell, 1990. xi, 337, [3] p. : ill. ; 22.9 cm (The language library) ISBN 0-631-14081-6

Quirk et al. 1991Quirk, Randolph et al. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. 9th impression. London ; New York : Longman, 1991, ©1985. x, 1779 p. : ill. ; 23.5 cm ISBN 0-582-51734-6

Trask 1999aTrask, R. L. Key concepts in language and linguistics. Reprinted. London ; New York : Routledge, 1999. xviii, 178 p. ; 19.8 cm (Key concepts) ISBN 0-415-15742-0

Trask 1999bTrask, R. L. A dictionary of grammatical terms and linguistics. Reprinted. London ; New York : Routledge, 1999. xv, 335 p. : ill. ; 21.7 cm ISBN 0-435-08628-0