Auxiliary verbs in English[edit]

Main article: English auxiliaries and contractions

The following sections consider auxiliary verbs in English. They list auxiliary verbs, then present the
diagnostics that motivate this special class (subject-auxiliary inversion and negation with not).
The modal verbs are included in this class, due to their behavior with respect to these diagnostics.

A list of auxiliaries in English[edit]

A list of verbs that (can) function as auxiliaries in English is as follows: [9]
be (am, are, is, was, were, being, been), can, could, dare, do (does, did), have (has, had, ha
ving), may, might, must, need, ought, shall, should, will, would
The status of dare, need (not), and ought (to) is debatable.[10] and the use of these verbs as
auxiliaries can vary across dialects of English. If the negative forms can't, don't, won't, etc. are
viewed as separate verbs (and not as contractions), then the number of auxiliaries increases.
The verbs do and have can also function as full verbs or as light verbs, which can be a source of
confusion about their status. The modal
verbs (can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, would, and dare, need and ought when
included) form a subclass of auxiliary verbs. Modal verbs are defective insofar as they cannot be
inflected, nor do they appear as gerunds, infinitives, or participles.
The following table summarizes the auxiliary verbs in standard English and the meaning
contribution to the clauses in which they appear. Many auxiliary verbs are listed more than once
in the table based upon discernible differences in use.
Auxiliary verb

Meaning contribution

Example

be1

copula (= linking verb)

She is the boss.

be2

progressive aspect

He is sleeping.

be3

passive voice

They were seen.

can1

deontic modality

I can swim.

can2

epistemic modality

Such things can help.

could1

deontic modality

I could swim.

could2

epistemic modality

That could help.

dare

deontic modality

How dare you!

do1

do-support/emphasis

You did not understand.

do2

question

Do you like it?

have

perfect aspect

They have understood.

may1

deontic modality

May I stay?

may2

epistemic modality

That may take place.

might

epistemic modality

We might give it a try.

must1

deontic modality

You must not mock me.

must2

epistemic modality

It must have rained.

need

deontic modality

You need not water the grass.

ought

deontic modality

You ought to play well.

shall

deontic modality

You shall not pass.

should1

deontic modality

You should listen.

should2

epistemic modality

That should help.

will1

epistemic modality

We will eat pie.

will2

future tense

The sun will rise tomorrow at 6:03.

will3

habitual aspect

He will make that mistake every time.

would1

epistemic modality

Nothing would accomplish that.

would2

future-in-the-past tense

After 1990, we would do that again.

would3

habitual aspect

Back then we would always go there.

Deontic modality expresses an ability, necessity, or obligation that is associated with an

agent subject. Epistemic modality expresses the speaker's assessment of reality or
likelihood of reality. Distinguishing between the two types of modality can be difficult, since
many sentences contain a modal verb that allows both interpretations.

Diagnostics for identifying auxiliary verbs in English[edit]

The verbs listed in the previous section can be classified as auxiliaries based upon two
diagnostics: they allow subjectauxiliary inversion (the type of inversion used to form
questions etc.) and (equivalently) they can take not as a postdependent (a dependent that
follows its head). The following examples illustrate the extent to which subjectauxiliary
inversion can occur with an auxiliary verb but not with a full verb:[11]
a. He was working today.
b. Was he working today? - Auxiliary verb was allows subjectauxiliary inversion.
a. He worked today.
b. *Worked he today? - Full verb worked does not allow subjectauxiliary inversion.
a. She can see it.
b. Can she see it? - Auxiliary verb can allows subjectauxiliary inversion.
a. She sees it.
b. *Sees she it? - Full verb sees does not allow subjectauxiliary inversion.
(The asterisk * is the means commonly used in linguistics to indicate that
the example is grammatically unacceptable.) The following examples
illustrate that the negation not can appear as a postdependent of a finite
auxiliary verb, but not as a postdependent of a finite full verb: [12]
a. Sam would try that.
b. Sam would not try that. - The negation not appears as a postdependent of the finite auxiliary would.
a. Sam tried that.
b. *Sam tried not that. - The negation not cannot appear as a postdependent of the finite full verb tried.
a. Tom could help.
b. Tom could not help. - The negation not appears as a postdependent of the finite auxiliary could.
a. Tom helped.
b. *Tom helped not. - The negation not cannot appear as a postdependent of the finite full verb helped.

A third diagnostic that can be used for identifying auxiliary

verbs is verb phrase ellipsis. Auxiliary verbs can introduce
verb phrase ellipsis, but main verbs cannot.[citation needed] See
the article on verb phrase ellipsis for examples.
Note that these criteria lead to the copula be being
considered an auxiliary (it undergoes inversion and takes
postdependent not, e.g., Is she the boss?, She is not the
boss). However, if one defines auxiliary verb as a verb that
somehow "helps" another verb, then the copula be is not
an auxiliary, because it appears without another verb. The
literature on auxiliary verbs is somewhat inconsistent in this
area.[13]

Auxiliary verbs vs. light verbs[edit]

Some syntacticians distinguish between auxiliary verbs
and light verbs.[14][15] The two are similar insofar as both verb
types contribute mainly just functional information to the
clauses in which they appear. Hence both do not qualify as
separate predicates, but rather they form part of a
predicate with another expression - usually with a full verb
in the case of auxiliary verbs and usually with a noun in the
case of light verbs.
In English, light verbs differ from auxiliary verbs in that they
cannot undergo inversion and they cannot take not as a
postdependent. The verbs have and do can function as
auxiliary verbs or as light verbs (or as full verbs). When
they are light verbs, they fail the inversion and negation
diagnostics for auxiliaries, e.g.
a. They had a long meeting.
b. *Had they a long meeting? - Light verb had fails the inversion test.
c. *They had not a long meeting. - Light verb had fails the negation test.
a. She did a report on pandering politicians.
b. *Did she a report on pandering politicians? - Light verb did fails the inversion test.
c. *She did not a report on pandering politicians. - Light verb did fails the negation test.
(In some cases, though, have may
undergo auxiliary-type inversion
and negation even when it is not
used as an auxiliary verb
see Subjectauxiliary inversion:
Inversion with other types of verb.)
Sometimes the distinction
between auxiliary verbs and light
verbs is overlooked or confused.
Certain verbs (e.g., used to, have
to, etc.) may be judged as light
verbs by some authors, but as
auxiliaries by others.[16]

Multiple
auxiliaries[edit]
Most clauses contain at least one
main verb, and they can contain
zero, one, two, three, or perhaps
even more auxiliary verbs.[17] The
following example contains three
auxiliary verbs and one main verb:
The paper will have been scrutinized by Fred.
The auxiliary verbs are in bold
and the main verb is
underlined. Together these
verbs form a
verb catena (chain of verbs),
i.e., they are linked together in
the hierarchy of structure and
thus form a single syntactic
unit. The main
verb scrutinizedprovides the
semantic core of sentence
meaning, whereby each of the
auxiliary verbs contributes
some functional meaning. A
single finite clause can
contain more than three
auxiliary verbs, e.g.
Fred may be being judged to have been deceived by the explanation.
Viewing this sentence as
consisting of a single
finite clause, there are
five auxiliary verbs and
two main verbs present.
From the point of view
of predicates, each of the
main verbs constitutes the
core of a predicate, and
the auxiliary verbs
contribute functional
meaning to these
predicates. These verb
catenae
are periphrastic forms of
English, English being a
relatively analytic
language. Other
languages, such as Latin,
are synthetic, which
means they tend to
express functional

meaning with affixes, not

with auxiliary verbs.
The periphrastic verb
combinations in the
example just given are
represented now using
the dependency
grammar tree of the
sentence; the verb catena
is in green:[18]

The particle to is
included in the verb
catena because its
use is often required
with certain infinitives.
The hierarchy of
functional categories
is always the same.
The verbs expressing
modality appear
immediately above
the verbs expressing
aspect, and the verbs
expressing aspect
appear immediately
above the verbs

expressing voice. The

verb forms for each
combination are as
follows:
Functional meaning

Verb combination

Example

Modality

finite modal verb + infinitive

may be

Perfect aspect

form of auxiliary verb have + perfect active participle

have been

Progressive aspect

form of auxiliary verb be + progressive active participle

be being

Passive voice

form of auxiliary verb be + passive participle

been deceived
English allows
clauses with both
perfect and
progressive
aspect. When this
occurs, perfect
aspect is superior
to progressive
aspect, e.g.