Talk:List of English copulae

message: What about "sound" and "taste"?  —JerryFriedman 23:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also "stay", "remain", and "keep" (as in "keep quiet")?  —JerryFriedman 23:51, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

text: And "wax" (as in "wax poetic" or "wax eloquent")? Jeff Worthington 00:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: I gather that the task set here is a compilation of EVERY SINGLE verb that could be conceived of as a Copula, in alphabetical order. Might I ask the following:
1. Of what earthly use would this be to anyone?
2. Lists don't explain ANYTHING. My objection to the article in general is that it consistently uses long lists of things as a substitute for an explanation. For example, I get far more useful info on what a copula is from a basic definition on any on-line dictionary. 
3.In these on-line definitions, copula is said to belong to the field of grammar rather than linguistics. That is where I would have put it.
4. How is a copula, in English at any rate, different to a transitive verb. It seems, from the list starting to take shape here, that just about ANY verb could be said to "link a subject to a predicate". What else do verbs do? The article fails to give simple info on these basics.
5. Look at (1)"He gained access to the Internet" and (2)"He accessed the Internet". Is "gained" a copula in (1), with "access" as the predicate? And is "accessed" a copula in (2) with "Internet" as the predicate? 
6. What about "Tom went to the shop"? Is THIS an example of a "went to" as a copula? Because if it is, then so is just about every verb known. Look at my note in the article on clear writing and try to fix it up. I am a medically-retired writer of manuals, and have 25 years' experience in the field and I would red-line just about everything I see here. And apparently, the same attitude is displayed in other articles on grammar. Dense, obsessively detailed, abstruse, ramshackle, and with the same tendency to use lists as a substitute for clear explanation.
---
Notice that all these verbs have to do with appearance and being. Your examples like "gained access" and "accessed" do not fit the general purpose of these ones. I don't see how a list like this can be so lacking in "clear writing"; it seems fairly clear to me. Just from looking at this list I can instantly get a perfect idea of what defines a copula and where copulae are used. I'm not sure why you're having trouble.
Actually, I see now what you mean about "ANY verb" having the purpose of "linking a subject to a predicate". However, the use of "link" in this case is the same as in the often-taught term "linking verb". It's not just any relation; "Tom went to the shop" does not at all match the concept of Tom with the concept of a shop. --Fashnek 05:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly copula is a valid grammatical (sub)category. I do agree with the spirit of the anonymous user's second point, however: lists are less useful than explanations. I am not convinced that this list is useful or notable. At the very least, it needs a better lead section. The fact that the anonymous user above did not understand the difference between copula and transitive verbs after reading the list shows that the current lead section is insufficient. See Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone lists)#Lead and selection criteria. Cnilep (talk) 15:56, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

text: so with...  "Tom entered the shop;"  entered is NOT a copula because the subject is a person and the linked to predicate is a thing?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xetxo (talk • contribs) 19:12, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  let's not get completely anal.... 

message: What are "am" and "are" doing at in this list? "To be" is sufficient. — 217.46.147.13 (talk) 16:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forms of "to be" 

message: Every example given uses "Tom" as the subject, except for one: "taste 'The gâteau tastes delightful.'"  For the sake of consistency, I think we should replace this with "Tom tastes delightful."  Mmm, that would be much better. —Iamthedeus (talk) 21:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistency 

message: What are non-copula called?  I don't fully understand this concept so maybe this is a non-applicable question, but it may be nice to have a link to the copula's counterpart if such a concept has been articled somewhere on wiki already.Xetxo (talk) 19:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does copula contrast with? 

message: Shouldn't that be 'acted suspiciously'?--Jcvamp (talk) 01:11, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ....erm, see the section immediately above. 86.160.216.66 (talk) 02:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acted suspicious 

message: *fade as in "He faded away"  seems very dubious to me. Surely "fade away" is just an ordinary phrasal verb?
*I am also unsure about leave with example "They left happy." What about "They arrived happy", "They departed happy", "They died happy", "They went away happy". The list could go on. Are these all valid?
*Should we be including phrasal verbs like end up as in "I ended up broke"? If so, what about "I finished up broke", "He fell down dead", "I wound up dead", "I pulled up short" -- and that's just after a minute's thought.
*What about sleep in "slept easy"?
This article needs a solid explanation of the inclusion criteria.
86.160.216.66 (talk) 02:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed.  Another problem is "rest", which takes only one adjective as a complement (except in one interpretation of the historical phrase "God rest you merry"). —JerryFriedman  (Talk) 22:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, I wouldn't keep leave. It's looks very much like a flat adverb. -- Puisque (talk) 06:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Also, compare "They left happy." → "Happy, they left." with "They are happy." → "Happy, they are.". The second transformation doesn't work (unless you are Yoda). I think clauses on which a transformation like this doesn't work can count as copulae. Further examples: "Tom turned angry." → "Angry, Tom turned." (doesn't work without changing meaning); "Tom appears satisfied" → "Satisfied, Tom appears" (doesn't work without changing meaning); "Tom arrived angry" → "Angry, Tom arrived" (works). I think there is a copular use of "to leave", but it is transitive, as in "to leave alone", "to leave out", "to leave unsettled"; e.g. "The sight of the corpse left Tom unsettled", "Tom left his brother alone in his office", "Tom will leave his enemies out of his team". Thoughts, anyone? Pied Kiwi (talk) 18:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  fade, leave, etc. 

message: Is emerge the victor a copulative use? Webster's has it as an idiom --Backinstadiums (talk) 12:06, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  emerge the victor 

message: Often unexpected candidates serve as linking verbs: “The rule sweeps too broad.” (The writer intends not to describe a manner of sweeping, but to say that the rule is broad.) --Backinstadiums (talk) 19:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  sweep 

message: My understanding is that mainly bring together two main words. The connector is not itself the focus. I think "means" fits the definition. Backfromquadrangle (talk) 02:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is "means" appropriate for the list? 

message: Should we coordinate this page and the Wiktionary one at https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:English_copulae ?
This one is currently missing these from Wiktionary: bleed,
burn,
leave,
lie,
plead,
rest,
sink,
sit,
start, start out,
stand,
test,
turn out Backfromquadrangle (talk) 03:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  coordinate Wikipedia and Wiktionary?