I. INTRODUCTION The aim of this work is to analyze the differences and similarities between English and Czech predications with regards to their level of semantic dynamism. First of all, I will concentrate on the whole concept of dynamism in semantics. This includes the general characteristics as well as the concrete realization of the category in English and Czech. I will then describe the characteristic features of predicates and their categorical division according to the grammatical and semantic criteria. This division was made presumably on the ground of the book A Functional Analysis of Present Day English on a General Linguistic Basis by Vilém Mathesius. I have tried to describe the characteristics of predications in English and compare them to predications in Czech. In this linguistic analysis of English and Czech predications I have concentrated especially on the major differences between them as English and Czech are not closely related language. This analysis will serve as the basis for my further study. I will then explain other differences between the two languages as I will concentrate in more detail on the specific features of English that are not typical for Czech, especially sentence condensation and the tendency of English to nominal expression of reality. Another major difference between English and Czech is their system of tenses that I will describe later. English has a very complex system that combine the present, past and future tenses existing in Czech with progressive and perfect aspects. The choice of a concrete type of tense always depends on the dynamism of a concrete situation. As the dynamism of some situation is later modified by the choice of language units to describe it, I will set up, in the next part of my analysis, a scale of dynamism that reflects both of the stages. I will explain all of the categories but in most detail those categories where the expression of the same extra-linguistic considerably differs in English and Czech. I will further support my conclusions with concrete examples of predications from the first two chapters of two original books and their translations. As original sources served for my study Karel Čapek’s book Válka s Mloky and -1- Main Street written by Sinclair Lewis. Čapek’s book was translated by Ewald Osers and Main Street by Eva Kondrysová. I have chosen these two books because they were written in similar periods of time and because their first two chapters are of a similar length. I have also preferred to have one original text and one translation in both of the languages so that I could minimize the risks of including in my analysis subjective style of a translator instead of an objective reality. The concrete examples presented in this part of the study are always the most typical examples that represent the true reality, not some outskirt phenomena. All of the conclusions that I have made concerning predications and their dynamism are supported by arguments, illustrated by examples and are fully correspondent with the results of the statistic comparison. II. THE CONCEPT OF DYNAMISM The most dynamic part of speech is a verb because verbs are “fitted (by their capacity to show tense and aspect, for example) to indicate action, activity and temporary or changing conditions” (Quirk, Greenbaum 1972: 48). Nouns, as the least dynamic part of speech, occupy a position opposite to that of verbs. They could be characterized as “stative” because they refer to entities that are regarded as stable, whether concrete or abstract (Quirk, Greenbaum 1972: 48). Other parts of speech are somewhere between these two. This fact is true both in English and Czech though there are differences in dynamism within the categories themselves. Even some nouns, for example, are not truly stative. Gerund is a special kind of an English noun. As it was formed from a verb, it is characteristic for some features that are common for nouns and others that are common for verbs. Gerund, therefore, has a certain level of dynamism. An example of a gerund is the noun “reading” in Reading books is my favourite hobby . Similarly, a verbal noun in Czech is more dynamic than other nouns: Mám rád čtení knih (Vachek 1980: 109). -2- English adjectives are generally more dynamic than their Czech counterparts in that they have the possibility not just to denote a permanent quality of a person or a thing but also one which occurs only in the particular situation as in the sentence He was late in coming that day (Vachek 1980: 104). As Czech adjectives are lacking this property, the sentences must be translated with a verb: Toho dne se opozdil . In spite of this, it would not be proper to say that Czech adjectives are fully stative. There is a certain group of adjectives, verbal adjectives, which have a higher degree of dynamism than other adjectives (“dělající”, “spící”) (Komárek 1986: 142). Considering the characteristic features of adjectives, such as their ability to denote some temporary quality, their similarity to verbs in the passive voice, it is possible to say that adjectives are more dynamic than nouns. Even the most dynamic part of speech, the group of verbs, has an inside diversity. Verbs are usually divided into two basic groups in semantics – into dynamic and stative verbs. Whereas stative verbs denote some rather permanent quality (know, like), dynamic verbs refer to some action, changing situation (dance, rain) (Hladký 1998: 73-74). Even stative verbs, however, are not truly stative in that they can be conjugated and express a change in this way (I knew it but I don’t know it anymore ). All of them are therefore more dynamic than dynamic adjectives or nouns. This does not concern those verbs which are not fully grammatically independent. Such verbs that lost the semantic centre of gravity are very much similar to a copula and can not be bearers of dynamism though they may seem like that ( They are getting ready ) (Vachek 1980: 104). III. PREDICATION TYPES IN ENGLISH AND CZECH As I am going to analyze the English and Czech predicates on the basis of their dynamism, it is necessary to present the linguistic classification of the system of predication -3- in both languages. According to Mathesius, there are four main types of predication: actional predication, qualifying predication, existential predication and possessive predication. Actional predication is a predication that denotes taking some action. The most frequent way of expressing action in both languages is a purely verbal predication in the finite verb form: I saw her yesterday - Včera jsem ji viděl . However, there is also the verbo-nominal predication which is quite common in English and not much common in Czech. Verbo- nominal predication is a predication that combines a verb and a noun (Mathesius 1975: 104). A several subcategories of verbo-nominal predication could be established in order to illustrate properly this kind of predication. In the first subcategory, both the action and the agent are expressed by a single nominal expression functioning as the rheme of the sentence. In the second subcategory, the agent and the action are divided between the theme and the rheme of the actual statement. The example of the first subcategory in English is the sentence with the common English existential construction “there is”: There has been a steady rising in the prices of gold. Not placing the rheme at the beginning of the sentence is enabled by the use of “there is” which serves as a theme but has almost void meaning. As English has a fixed word order, this construction offers one of the small number of possibilities for placing the rheme towards the end of the statement. The action is expressed nominally by the gerund (“a steady rising”), not by the verb (Vachek 1980: 98). A little different type of sentences with the construction “there is” represents this example: There was a sharp wind blowing. Here, it is not obvious whether “there was” belongs to the “wind” or whether it is a part of the construction “there was a blowing” with “wind” as an attribute though the first possibility seems to be more likely. The use of “there is” in English sentences is common in these instances: when the subject is unknown or when it does not have to be expressed, when the entire action is the rheme and therefore it suits better the requirements of the functional sentence perspective. Sometimes, the only explanation for using the construction can only be -4- the tendency of English for nominal expression of verbal action (Mathesius 1975: 105). This could be one of the reasons why no similar construction exists in Czech. The second subcategory where the agent and the action are distributed between the theme and the rheme can be found in Czech as well, though they are less common than in English. These verbo-nominal structures have four types: possessive, causative, adverbial and a predication affected by adjectival qualification (Mathesius 1975: 106). Possessive type of actional predication is expressed by a noun that is connected to a copula “have” or to another verb with similar meaning. Instances of such constructions in English are: “to have a shave”, “to have a smoke” etc. Another example could be the sentence I have no hesitation in stating that you are wrong (Mathesius 1975: 106). This possessive predication is possible in Czech as well. Though these predications may seem like those of a verbal kind, “have” in many ways resembles a copula from the semantic point of view (Dušková 1994: 409). These are some instances of actional predication of the possessive type in Czech: Už jsi měl snídani? Měli jsme spolu takovou debatu.