Phrases as the The Affirmative, Interrogative or Negative may look rare or even strange, if we think about everyday language. Let us reckon on something usual as a strawberry, to work these phrases out.

With the Affirmative, we may think about a real strawberry in view. Grammar will help tell if that view belongs with the PAST, PRESENT, or FUTURE; if the strawberry was generally on a table, we predict we will be in some progress with it, or maybe we have had some strawberry experience to a time.

With the Interrogative, the strawberry may be even completely a theory, and with the Negative, there is no strawberry in view at all.

To make own paths with language and time, we need to decide if we affirm, ask a question, or deny. We can talk examples about Bob and Jemma. Feel welcome also to meet them ■→OFF THE RECORD.

We are in the PRESENT field of time.

Simple: Jemma learns.
Progressive: Bob is reading.
Perfect: Bob and Jemma have worked on language.

Simple: Does Jemma worry?
Progressive: Is Bob reverberating?
Perfect: Have Bob and Jemma failed?

Let us make observations. Our human and logical potential for asking questions has language elements move. Grammars name it the inversion.

Jemma is helping Bob.
Is Jemma helping Bob?

To grasp inversion, let us think about verbals and nominals.

Language forms as to play, to be playing, is playing, or having played are verbals. They tell what happens, or what someone or something does. Verbals can be just verbs or verb phrases.

Language forms as a game, a card game, or the game of the Sound are nominals. They answer questions as Who or What? Nominals can be just nouns or noun phrases. (We may learn the game in Part 4 of our journey).

The nominal and the the verbal are roles. Let us see them marked for a phrase as
The verb “to be” is an irregular verb:
NOMINAL (What?): The verb “to be”
NOMINAL (What?): an irregular verb.
The form “to be” is not a verbal here.

Our ■→COLOR CODE works roles, not isolated words.
I am a learner.
I am learning.

American English (the same as any English) is an SVO (SUBJECT―VERB―OBJECT) language. To affirm, we begin with the subject and follow up with the verb, which we may complement with an object.

If we agree to make subjects from nominals, we can have word movement generally for a highlight. In the famous To be or not to be, that is the question, by Shakespeare, the nominal, the question, is the SUBJECT, only the order of words is changed, for the sake of style.

The question is, to be or not to be.

Generative grammars recognize language deep structures. Otherwise, we might have difficulty telling the verbal from the nominal, as in telling a verb from reference to it:
a. Is the verb to be an irregular verb?
Yes, we are exercising irregular verbs.
b. Is the verb “to be” an irregular verb?
Yes, it has three forms and six shapes.

Stylistic movement of words is not anything extraordinary. We may compare Exercise 14 in ■→SUB-CHAPTER 4.2. The auxiliary can take a feature as (ES), and go before a nominal, or after a pronoun.
The orchard has a precious tree.
A precious tree, does the orchard have.
A precious tree, it does have.

The matter is not in formal or colloquial styles. We could say that language has pronouns for “shorter nominals”. As emphasis, the Simple Aspect allows saying,
Do read this all, please.

To ask questions, we most often move auxiliaries to places before subjects. Dependent on the grammar approach, we may view the word order as VSO then, or SVO still, as our mauve head verb does not move.

We can play the Sound.
HEAD VERB: play.

Can we play the Sound?
HEAD VERB: play?

Dependent on the context and style, we also might ask a question, saying
“You can play the Sound?”
The deep structure would be
Can you play the Sound?
There is no syntactic marker for such questions, however, and we interpret them in context, the same as all language.

Let us now have a look at patterns that help deny, in the PRESENT field of time.

Simple: Jemma does not worry.
Progressive: Bob is not reverberating.
Perfect: Bob and Jemma have not failed.

We often abbreviate our patterns, in everyday speech.

Simple: Jemma doesn’t worry.
Progressive: Bob isn’t reverberating.
Perfect: Bob and Jemma haven’t failed.

We can combine the Interrogative and Negative extents, to ask negative questions.
We could ask, “Isn’t Jemma smiling?”
(We really say that Jemma is smiling).

Simple: Doesn’t Jemma travel in grammar?
Progressive: Isn’t Bob traveling in grammar?
Perfect: Haven’t Bob and Jemma traveled in grammar?

Let us compare formal American English, as for school. Formal syntax does not follow abbreviated auxiliaries.

Simple: Does Jemma not travel in grammar?
Progressive: Is Bob not traveling in grammar?
Perfect: Has Bob not traveled in grammar?

To focus on word movement and language features, we can use the Simple Aspect. The verb to do is the auxiliary. It takes the ending (ES) for the third person singular (he, she, or it), as an auxiliary and also as the head verb.

The Affirmative: Jemma smileS.
The Interrogative: DoES Jemma travel in grammar?

Our logical capacity for denying has the negative element, not. This element can join the auxiliary.
The Negative: Jemma doES not worry.
The Negative Interrogative: DoES Jemma not earn her credits?

In everyday language, the forms are most often abbreviated.
The Negative: Jemma doESN’T worry.
The Negative Interrogative: DoESN’T Jemma earn her credits?

■→APPENDIX 4 has patterns for all aspects, also with abbreviations.

What happens in the FUTURE field of time?
Our Expression retains all qualities.

Simple: Jemma will smile.
Progressive: Bob will be smiling, too.
Perfect: Bob and Jemma will have earned their credits.

The logic for the FUTURE is likely to bring the auxiliary WILL into our scopes. The auxiliary be or have stays to its basic form (be; have). ■→PRACTICE 2.1. has notes on verb base forms.

Simple: Will Jemma smile?
Progressive: Will Bob be smiling, too?
Perfect: Will Bob and Jemma have earned their credits?

The negative element, not, joins the auxiliary WILL, for the Negative.

Simple: Jemma will not worry.
Progressive: Bob will not be reverberating.
Perfect: Bob and Jemma will not have failed.

The phrase will not becomes won’t, in everyday American.

Simple: Jemma won’t worry.
Progressive: Bob won’t be reverberating.
Perfect: Bob and Jemma won’t have failed.

Again, formal American English will not follow abbreviation.

Simple: Will she not smile?
Progressive: Will he not be smiling, too?
Perfect: Will they not have earned their credits?
Feel welcome to ■→SUBCHAPTER 5.1. We sum up on our logic so far.

■→This text is also available in Polish.


The world may never have seen her original handwriting, if her skill was taken for supernatural. Feel welcome to Poems by Emily Dickinson prepared for print by Teresa Pelka: thematic stanzas, notes on the Greek and Latin inspiration, the correlative with Webster 1828, and the Aristotelian motif, Things perpetual — these are not in time, but in eternity.
■→Free access, Internet Archive
Electronic format $2.99
■→E-pub | NOOK Book | Kindle
Soft cover, 260 pages, $16.89
■→Amazon | Barnes & Noble
Hard cover, 260 pages
■→Barnes & Noble | Lulu



Internet Archive, the free text and image repository

■→Feel welcome to use the materials in my account
The posters are available to shop online as well.