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. However, instances of this type are quite rare and, moreover, there always exist verbal constructions with almost identical meaning which are being used with a similar or higher frequency (“mít snídani”- “nasnídat se”, “ mít debatu”- “debatovat”).

The causative type of actional predication, on the other hand, hardly exists in Czech.

The action is, again, expressed nominally but the verb that joins the noun to the subject has the meaning similar to “to do, to perform” such as You shall do the shopping and I will do the cooking (Mathesius 1975: 106). Czech does not use this type of predication and uses the verbal one instead. These are two examples showing the difference: “do the shopping” –

“nakoupit”, “do the cooking” – “uvařit”.

Another type of actional predication is the adverbial. The action is expressed by a noun in the adverbial form, by a prepositional phrase. The verb is merely denoting that the

-5- subject has some relation to the action. One example of this type of predication can be the sentence The Prime Minister and the more moderate group are now in full control of the state , other examples are the following constructions: “to be in love”, “to be in blossom”, “to be in a hurry”, “to be under repair”. In Czech, again, similar examples are rare and always exist side-by-side with truly verbal constructions: Stromy jsou v květu - Stromy kvetou

(Dušková 1994: 413).

The last type of actional predication is the one effected by adjectival qualification.

This type is very characteristic of English because English adjectives can denote not only a permanent quality but also a temporary feature, that is valid just in particular situation. This is the case, for example, of the sentence The organ of the party is frankly critical of the new move. The English adjective “critical” does not fully correspond to the Czech adjective

“kritický”. This adjective almost invariably denotes a permanent quality, whereas the English

“critical of” expresses a temporary quality valid only in one concrete situation. There exist other varieties of actional verbo-nominal predication effected by adjectival qualification. In the above-mentioned example, the adjective expresses the action itself. In the following examples, on the other hand, the qualifying adjective denotes only an aspect of the action and the action itself is construed as the specification of the adjective: In that district the crisis was long in making itself felt and He is sure to come (Mathesius 1975: 106).

Actional predication effected by adjectival qualification is also possible in Czech though it is not as common as in English. The main reason for this is the fact that Czech adjectives are less dynamic than those in English and therefore, they are not suited for expressing action. If the predication is actional, it is reached by other means, such as the use of specific words that express the temporarity of the action. The typical example is the phrase

Byl jsem najednou vážný (Grepl 1986: 249). “Najednou” here is the proof of the temporarity

-6- not of the state, and what proves the existence of the action is the sentence with similar meaning but using verbal predication: Najednou jsem zvážněl .

Besides active actional predication, there also exists passive actional predication which does not have to necessarily be in the passive form, according to Mathesius. There are even different levels of passivity; weakened activeness is called perceptivity. Perceptivity can not be considered as entirely active performance because feelings are not something what we do but rather something that we are exposed to. Such difference in activity is best expressed when we compare these two verbs with similar meaning: “to look” (active) – “to see”

(passive). Whilst it is possible in Czech to express this difference by verbal aspect

(“vzpomínat si”, active – “vzpomenout si”, passive), in English it can be expressed merely by lexical means (“to try to remember” or “to recollect”, active – “to remember”, passive). There is also a possibility in Czech to express the difference by using a personal or impersonal construction: “chci spát” (active) – “chce se mi spát” (passive) (Mathesius 1975: 107).

The opposite of activeness is expressed by passive predication. This type of predication is frequently used in English. An English passive mostly has the analytical, not syntactical form; it is often expressed by the construction of the auxiliary with the non-finite verb denoting the action proper ( I was given the present ). There is a specific type of predication, however, where the notional verb can express the passive predication by itself, for example with the help of the verbs “to read”, “to sell”, “to act”. The contrast in the active and passive use of these verbs is emphasized in the following examples: Any bookseller sells this book because it sells well . The actor usually reads the play before he acts it. If it reads well he may be sure that it acts well (Mathesius 1975: 108). Czech language does not have verbs which would not change when expressing passive. Most frequently the passive form in

English corresponds to reflexive form in Czech: I polished the table up yesterday – Včera jsem vyleštil stůl . The table polishes badly – Ten stůl se špatně leští (Dušková 1994: 255).

-7-

The syntactical expression of passive in English is an exception. In the vast majority of cases, the passive is expressed by an analytical form, by the construction of the auxiliary with the passive participle of the notional verb. The auxiliary of the English passive is “to be”

(The play is performed by our best actors ). The passive in English is characteristic for it not being possible sometimes to distinguish between a passive action and a present state resulting from a passive action, as it is so in this example: The house is built . In Czech the difference is expressed by the aspect of the participle: Dům je stavěn (imperfective) – Dům je dostavěn

(perfective). The imperfective can also be denoted by the construction “to be being built”: The house is being built . It is also important to make a remark that it is common in English to have a passive with an indirectly affected object. There can be an indirect subject of the passive predication or even a prepositional object of the active verb. It is possible to say The boy was helped by his father or I have been told . Czech, in contrast, does not use this type of passive predication; the subject is always affected directly. Only in rare cases the genitive object of the active can be used as the subject of the passive if there is vacillation in the active between the genitive and the accusative construction ( Města bylo dobyto ). The style is, however, rather bookish and on the language periphery (Mathesius 1975: 108-109). The most frequent Czech passive construction is similar to that in English. It is a construction of the auxiliary “být” with the passive participle of the notional verb (pasívum opisné): “byl opraven”, “je kritizován” (Grepl 1986: 156).

English can distinguish several types of passive actional predication. Besides the already analyzed participial form of passive predication, there are also these four less common types: the nominally qualifying predication is specific in that the action is expressed by nominal qualification and it is joined to the subject by a linking verb: For centuries they were subject to a steady and a cruel persecution (Mathesius 1975: 110). Czech uses the common participial passive form in similar cases where the action is expressed by the

-8- notional verb. The example sentence must be, therefore, translated with a verb instead of a noun: Celá staletí byli vystaveni nepřetržitému a krutému pronásledování .

Another form of passive predication is the adverbial. The action is expressed by a nominal prepositional phrase. The finite verb has rather formal than semantic function as it is denoting the relation of the subject to the adverbial expression: This house has been in building since last autumn (Mathesius 1975: 110). In Czech, examples of this kind are rare and mostly have their verbal counterparts: Stromy jsou v květu – Stromy kvetou, Dům je v rekonstrukci – Dům se rekonstruuje .

The fourth type of passive predication is the possessive. Besides predications with directly affected subject that have been already analyzed, there are also possessive predications with indirectly affected subject. This type of predication is characteristic of

English. It is construed from the verb “to have”, object and a participle relating to the object.

Object can be directly dependent on the subject and bring the construction into relation with the subject, or object can be independent of the subject and the relation between them is then expressed by an adverbial adjunct accompanying the participle. The following example illustrates the situation when the object is directly dependent on the subject: Room was made for persons who had relatives going out. In the next example, the object is not directly dependent on the subject: This tract has a rich vein of philosophy running through it. The present participle “running” is related to the object and its relation to the subject is expressed by the adverbial phrase “through it”, accompanied by the participle. The third type can be characterized by the participle in the present form and by the object denoting the performer of the action: I had one Colossus bulging over my shoulders . The next type of possessive passive predication is the one with a passive participle and the object that is expressing a person or a thing directly affected by the action: I had my door broken in or On his entrance he had loud accusations raised against him . This construction is specific for English. Such constructions

-9- are not possible in Czech because Czech has passive predication with directly affected subject only (Mathesius 1975: 109-111).

The last type of passive predication is perceptive. Even this type of passive predication is frequent in English. “Perceptive predication often expresses states, emotions or operations that the subject performs himself, but rather unawares or with weakened volition (Mathesius,

1975: 112).” The basic unit of this construction is a verb “to find”, “to see”, “to feel” or another verb with similar meaning from the perceptive verbs group. There exist many possibilities how the constructions could look like. In the first case, the object depends on the subject and the participle in relation to the object has the present form: At these words I found my heart beating violently . The second possibility is the construction where the object is not directly dependent on the subject and the participle, again, has the present form. Adverbial adjunct then expresses the relation to the subject. The following sentence is one example of this kind: There was a strange charm in his voice, which I found exercising a strong influence over me . Perceptive type is specific in that the object is often a reflexive pronoun (such as myself ). This perceptive passive predicate with a reflexive pronoun is in many ways unique.

For example, in Czech translation the subject is the same as in English, whereas in other types the subjects in the two languages differ: I caught myself talking to them – Přistihl jsem se, že s nimi hovořím (reflexive). I suddenly found my hands trembling – Náhle jsem zjistil, že se mi třesou ruce (other than reflexive) (Mathesius 1975: 112). All types of reflexive predication with a present participle can be used with a past participle as well. These are two instances of the predications with past participle, with object dependent on the subject and with object that is not directly dependent on the subject: His grandfather saw his fortune engulfed by the

South Sea abyss. On several occasions they found energetic protests raised against their methods of procedure… It is also possible with a reflexive pronoun: Suddenly I found myself confronted with a savage-looking man . There also exists another type with constructions of

-10- the verb “to find” and the anticipatory “it” which relates to a predicative adjective and anticipates an infinitive that follows the adjective: She found it difficult to say exactly what the shadow was . The subject in these perceptive constructions denotes the person which performs the action whereas the verb “to find” expresses the subjectivity of the situation. As far as the perceptive passive constructions in the Czech language are concerned, it is important to note that Czech uses this predication less frequently than English and some of those types are even unknown to that language (Mathesius 1975: 113). The first two types of perceptive predication where the object with the present participle is dependent on the subject and where, in the second type, the object with the present participle is not directly dependent on the subject, are hardly found in Czech. What is much more common instead, is a relative clause with the conjunctions “jak”, “že”, or other similar to these. The English sentence, for example, I found myself not knowing what to do has its Czech counterpart in Shledal jsem, že nevím, co mám dělat (Dušková 1994: 587). In some cases where English uses perceptive predication, it is possible to leave out the perceptive verb in Czech completely: At these words

I found my heart beating violently – Při těchto slovech se mi srdce prudce rozbušilo . The perceptive predication with a reflexive pronoun and a present participle is, again, almost unknown to Czech. Though the subject in English does not differ from that in the Czech translation, the present participle is often replaced by a relative clause or the perceptive verb is left out and the participle is replaced by a full-fledged verb: After another glass of whisky I caught myself talking confidently to everybody present can be translated to Czech as Po další sklenici whisky jsem se přistihl, že důvěrně hovořím ke všem přítomným or Po další sklenici whisky jsem důvěrně hovořil ke všem přítomným . Perceptive passive constructions with a past passive participle are also replaced by relative clauses or the perceptive verb is missing completely. Constructions with the verb “to find” and the anticipatory “it” are not frequently used in Czech as their meaning is often expressed by the constructions with the verb “to be” :

-11-

“bylo to”…, “bylo mu”… (Mathesius 1975: 112-113). Here is one example supporting the fact: She found it difficult to say what the shadow was – Bylo (to) pro ni těžké, říct, co byl ten stín . However, sentences similar to those with the English construction “to find + it” with a predicative adjective and infinitive are possible in Czech as well: Považoval to za zbytečné omlouvat se mu, když vlastně nic neudělal . Similar constructions without preposition could be represented by the following sentence: Shledal to zbytečným omlouvat se mu. Such constructions, though, are considered as being rather old-fashioned.

By comparing English and Czech passive constructions, it is not difficult to notice from all of the examples that English has a larger variety of them than Czech; some English constructions even have no counterparts in Czech, such as those with an indirectly affected subject. Not only are the English passives in great variety but they are, in addition, being used more frequently than in Czech. It is also important to compare the function of passive predication in English and Czech. First of all, passive predication is of a frequent use in

English in those cases where the theme of the utterance can become the grammatical subject or in cases where the preference is given to a personal subject if there is a choice between an animate and an inanimate one. Czech, in contrary to English, prefers an active predication in similar situations. English uses passive predication where the subject is indefinite or unknown, or where the speaker (or writer) finds the information about the subject superfluous.

Czech in similar situations can also use passive constructions but still the use of an active predication is more frequent: It will be remembered that several weeks ago we quoted a very important passage from a speech by Mr. Atlee here. Čtenáři si budou pamatovat, že před několika týdny jsme tady citovali důležitou pasáž projevu pana Atleeho . Finally, English uses a passive predication of the possessive type or the passive with the indirectly affected subject when it should be a part of the complex constructions with the rheme of the sentence: He was

-12- very glad to find himself so heartily greeted by everybody. Such constructions are unknown to

Czech (Mathesius 1975: 113-114).

Until now, only the actional predication has been analyzed. The second type of predication is called qualifying predication. “Qualifying predication expresses a qualification by which some quality (qualificans) is directly and explicitly assigned to a person or thing

(qualificandum) (Mathesius 1975: 114)”. Such quality, however, does not have to be assigned to the subject; there exist more possibilities as to which part of speech it should belong to. The most frequent type of qualifying predication is the copulative type. In this predication, the subject is qualified in such a way that the word the quality is assigned to and which functions as a predicate is joined to the subject by a copula- a verb, which has rather grammatical than lexical meaning (“to be”, “to remain”). Predicate can be expressed by a noun or by a noun with adjective. In the example Mr. Brown was a young teacher , both the noun and the adjective qualify the subject since they both add some new information. In the sentence Mrs.

Smith was a clever woman , however, the noun “woman” does not supply any new information since the information is already known from the subject, and therefore the qualification is expressed by the adjective “clever” only. Almost identical meaning has the sentence Mrs.

Smith was clever which is more idiomatic English. It could be described as qualification by non-genuine classification (Mathesius 1975: 114). This non-genuine type of qualification is quite frequent in English, especially its specific type that is unknown to Czech and that is based on the word “one”. Instead of the sentence His vocabulary is rich English often uses

His vocabulary is a rich one . This sentence type is common not only in the literary style but also in ordinary colloquial speech. This proves the possibility of English to repeat the noun that functions as a subject. There is one sub-type of non-genuine classification that is characteristic of English but hardly found in Czech. It is the classification which is combined with the inversion of subject and verb, and which uses not only the prop-word “one” but also

-13- a possessive pronoun preceding it. As a result, the possessive pronoun of this combination is then completely independent. These are the main stages: 1. My style is a clumsy style . 2. After the inversion of subject and verb: A clumsy style is my . 3. With the use of the prop-word

“one” and the possessive pronoun: A clumsy style is mine [my one] . 4. With the final inversion of the resultative sentence: Mine is a clumsy style (Vachek 1980: 102).

The qualifying predication which is construed by a noun and adjective differs from the predication constituted by an adjective only in the modality of predication. Non-genuine classification mostly expresses a permanent quality, whereas qualification that was formed with the help of an adjective and without noun tends to denote a temporary quality (Mathesius

1975: 115). The example sentence John is a clever man denotes a permanent quality of John while the sentence John is clever! rather expresses his behaviour in a certain situation.

The most frequent qualifying predication in Czech is the copulative type, the same as in English. Similarly, it is constituted by the word with assigned quality which functions as a predicate and by a verb with a copula function (“být”, “zůstat”). The non-genuine type of qualification with the prop-word “one” is, however, unknown to Czech. Czech, contrary to

English, never repeats the noun of the subject at the end of the sentence. Jeho životní dráha byla krátká could be translated into English in two ways: His career was short or His career was a short one . Czech, as well as English, can denote permanent quality by a noun with adjective or noun itself and a temporary quality by a qualifying predication with adjective alone. These examples show the difference in modality: Ty jsi hlupák (permanent) and Ty jsi hloupý (temporary). There exist other cases in which Czech is considerably different from

English. Many qualifying predications expressed by a substantive have no counterparts in

Czech. In the English sentence Doctors are no use in this case , the expression “no use” is a substantive qualifying grammatical subject that it is joined to by the copula verb “to be”. This type could be classified as a copulative qualification realized by a substantival exocentric (not

-14- concentric) expression. Whereas this type is quite common in English (another example could be the sentence I think she is your age ), similar constructions hardly exist in Czech. One example of this copulative qualification realized by a substantival exocentric expression in

Czech could be the phrase: On je pořád samý žert . The English sentences She was all smiles and graces , He was all ears and other of the identical type are on a large scale in English

(Mathesius 1975: 115).

Another type of qualifying predication is copulative adjectival qualification. This type is also very common in English. English adjectives have the capacity to express temporary quality and therefore they are more dynamic than their Czech counterparts. In the sentence

The speaker was very emphatic as to the possibility of voluntary contribution , the adjective

“emphatic” may also be used subjectively in reference to a person. In Czech, on the other hand, the adjective “emphatic”- “důrazný” can be used only for something that is carried out emphatically, such as “důrazný proces”, but not for a person. Adjectives with the suffix –ed are of a frequent use in English: The girl was blue-eyed . Moreover, they can express temporary quality as well: He proved to be kind-hearted . They are often specified by an adverb: He was very keen-eyed (Mathesius 1975: 116). Copulative adjectival qualification is in English often followed by an infinitive: You are very kind to invite me . In Czech, the infinitive is frequently replaced by a relative clause: Jste velmi laskav, že mě zvete .

Sometimes, the infinitive can be used as well. In the following example, the English sentence

He is hard to please is translated into Czech with the use of infinitive but without the personal subject: Je těžké mu vyhovět (Dušková 1994: 351).

Qualifying predication can occur with a construction of the copula and the adverb.

This is quite common with adverbs of place and time: I have been away from home three months now . The copula can also be followed by an adverb of manner as it is so in the sentence It is well to get thorough information before you say the last word . In the second

-15- example To go by car is very expensive, so it is by train , “so” is used as an adjective. There is a significant difference in Czech where “so” – “tak” is used in truly adverbial way: Je to tak .

Czech, as well as English, uses copula verbs with adverbs of manner: To je dobře . But Czech also has an adverb of manner in copulative qualification with infinitive in the place of the subject: Je dobře se na to důkladně zeptat . This construction exists in English as well

(Mathesius 1975: 116).

Qualifying constructions with a predicative noun preceded by the preposition “of” often correspond to the genitive: That’s of no consequence here . Sometimes constructions with the preposition may be characterized as non-genuine classification: That’s thing of no consequence . The preposition “of” could be found as well in the sentences with the qualifying adverbial predication. This is one of the many examples of this type in English: He was too much of a Puritan to enjoy the theatrical performances . The nucleus of the qualification is represented by a noun (“Puritan”) and the quality is assigned to the adverbial (“too much”)

(Mathesius 1975: 117). The Czech constructions corresponding to those in English with the preposition “of” are usually without a preposition: The question is of great interest – Tato otázka je velmi zajímavá (Dušková 1994: 351).

Passive qualification with the verb “to have” resembles, at least formally, copulative qualification. Here, also, the quality is assigned to a predicative nominal expression which is joined to the grammatical subject by the verb “to have”. One example of such copulative qualification could be the phrase: She has beauty still . This type of predication is possible in

Czech as well: Má v sobě něco solidního ( He has something solid about him ). Some constructions of quality can be further specified: He had the wisdom to remain silent

(Mathesius 1975: 117).

Another type of possessive qualification is expressed by the verb “to be” and a possessive pronoun: His was the wisdom of a ripe age. Such constructions are found only in

-16- literary English. As far as the Czech is concerned, it is important to stress that similar constructions do not exist there. The example sentence thus must be translated as Měl moudrost zralého věku.

Localizing predication is yet another type of qualifying predication. It is a predication where the qualificans is expressed by a nominal subject, whereas the predicate describes the presence of quality in something: There is nothing serious in him . Similar constructions exist in Czech: Není v něm za mák dobrého (Mathesius 1975: 118).

The fourth type of qualifying predication can be called identifying qualification. This predication usually begins with a demonstrative pronoun which often functions as a theme of the sentence. The noun functioning as a rheme is usually in concord with the demonstrative pronoun: This is my library or These are my friends . However, if a pronoun stands in the position of the rheme of the statement, such concord is not required: One says it is they

(Vachek 1980: 102). There exist two kinds of identifying qualification - pronominal qualification and adverbial. Pronominal qualification uses constructions similar to these: “it is”, “this is”, “this was”. In English, there is a general agreement between the subject and the predicate in the sentences with pronominal identification: This is a queer thing . Adverbial is more frequent in English than pronominal qualification. As an example of this type could serve the sentence Here is a queer thing . There is an idiomatic English construction which has the form of an identifying qualification: Read something from this book, there’s a good boy…

Identifying qualification is common in Czech, too. One example of the pronominal identification in Czech is the sentence To je klikatý potok! (not Ten potok je klikatý ). The construction To je můj bratr is yet another example of the pronominal identification. Similar meaning has the sentence Tady je můj bratr which represents the adverbial type of identifying qualification (Mathesius 1980: 118).

-17-

Besides the two main types of predication, the actional and the qualifying predication, there exist other less frequent predication types. One of them is called existential predication which states the existence of something. English has its specific construction “there is”, “there are…” for expressing this type of predication. One explanation of the importance of using this construction is the rule of the functional sentence perspective which requires the new information to be placed towards the end of a sentence. There is a tendency for the theme, in contrast, to be placed in the beginning of the sentence. As the English word order can not meet the requirements of the functional sentence perspective, the subject in English frequently has the thematic function, for example in passive. Existential construction is yet another way to behave in accordance with the functional sentence perspective (Mathesius 1975:119). The example There is a strong wind blowing outdoors is including a synthetic expression of the existential predication. The Czech translation Venku fouká silný vítr , in contrast, could be easily divided into grammatical subject (“vítr”) and the predicate (“fouká”) and both of them belong to the rheme of the statement. In another example There will be no smoke to come out of the chimneys of the deserted village , “the deserted village” functioning as a rheme and being the attribute of an adverbial adjunct can not become the subject unless the word order rules are violated. The existential construction, therefore, must be used in order to meet the requirements of the functional sentence perspective. The specific use of the existential predication could be expressed by a prepositional phrase: There was no possibility to escape .

There is another specific kind of existential predication as it is expressed by the example sentence There is no telling him about it . Existential denial of the action expresses the impossibility of the statement (Mathesius 1975: 119).

The fourth and last type of predication is called possessive predication. There are two main ways of expressing possessivity in European languages - by verbs of the “habere” type or by other means, such as adverbially. English belongs to the group of languages with the

-18- verb “habere”, “to have” in English. Possessive predication can be characterized by the existence of the possessor, the thing owned and the manner they are joined. The beginning of the statement is formed either by the possessor (“I have”) or by the thing possessed (“This belongs to me”). The example of the first type may be the sentence My father has a house and the example of the second type is This house belongs to my father . There are various possibilities of how to express the predication – the first type may use verbs such as “to have, to have got, to possess, to be possessed of, to be in possession of” whereas the second type can be expressed by constructions such as “to belong to, to be someone’s, to be in someone’s possession”. Czech, as well as English, belongs to the group of languages which use the

“habere” type of possessive predication. The most frequent verb to express this predication is the verb “mít” which is almost identical to the English “to have”. One of the differences in possessive predication in English and Czech is the fact that English favours the expression with the construction “to be someone’s”, such as The face was a Frenchwoman’s . Predication of the type “someone’s is something” is frequent in English as well: His was the butterfly period of life (Mathesius 1975: 119-120).

IV. SENTENCE CONDENSATION IN ENGLISH

As it could be derived from the comparison of the types of predication in English and

Czech, English has a wider range of various types and sub-types of predicates than Czech which predominantly uses the simple purely verbal predication. There exist other striking differences between English and Czech. English syntax, contrary to Czech, has one characteristic feature that is quite unique. It is the tendency towards condensation. That means that English frequently contains a large number of adjunctive sentence elements for the information which is expressed by a dependent clause in Czech. The information is then squeezed by means of adding another element of a nominal character. Because such nominal

-19- elements in English replace the dependent clauses in Czech, it is possible to describe them as being syntactically more condensed and call them “sentence condensers”. The most important part of the condensers is a nominal form derived from a verbal base. The three main grammatical forms functioning as a sentence condensers are: the infinitive, the participle, and the gerund (Vachek 1980: 106-107).

The above-mentioned tendency of English to use the sentence condensers has been already proved by some of the Czech linguists. Doctor Chvátalová, for example, compared

Katherine Mansfield’s book “Bliss and other stories” with Skoumal’s translation into Czech on the basis of sentence condensation and she came to interesting results. There was the total number of 1,025 cases of condensation in English in comparison to the mere 44 instances of condensation in the Czech translation of Mansfield’s stories (Hladký 1961: 106). The most frequent condensers are according to that study participles, followed by infinitives and gerunds. The most frequent Czech clauses replacing the English constructions with sentence condensers are paratactically arranged main clauses, whereas the infinitives in the English version correspond to Czech final and object clauses. These are two instances of condensation in English altogether with their Czech equivalents from the Mansfield’s book and Skoumal’s translation: 1. She went over to the window and leaned against it, pressing her hands against the pane. Přistoupila k oknu; opřela se o ně a ruce přitiskla na okenní tabulky. 2. I thought so at the time and decided to make a note of it. Tak mě to tehdy napadlo a umínil jsem si, že si to zapíši. The first example represents the most frequent type of complex condensation in

English, a present participle functioning as a sentence condenser is equivalent to a paratactical clause in Czech. Condensation in the second example is reached by means of infinitive which corresponds to the dependent clause in the Czech translation (Hladký 1961:107). The statistics and the examples prove that English uses sentence condensers more frequently than Czech.

Therefore, it is important to look further at the phenomenon. One of the three main sentence

-20- condensers is the infinitive. The infinitive is used as a condenser mainly in the final clauses, such as in the sentence He works hard to earn his living . In the Czech translation, the infinitive is replaced by a dependent clause: Těžce pracuje, aby se uživil . Sometimes, the infinitive can function as a sentence condenser even if the subjects in the main and dependent clause are not identical. It is possible if the infinitive is preceded by the preposition “for”: It is yet too early for you to leave . The infinitive is, again, replaced by a dependent clause in

Czech: Je ještě příliš brzy na to, aby odešli . Besides the final clauses, the infinitive may be used for condensation in other syntactical functions, such as in the example I remember to have heard it . The Czech translation with the dependent clause is Pamatuji si, že jsem to slyšel . The same condensing function the infinitive has in the exclamatory sentence To think that I have helped him! , which can be translated as Když si jen pomyslím, že jsem mu pomáhal! . The condensing capacity of English is increased by its characteristic feature of differentiation according to tense which does not exist in Czech. Besides the present infinitive, English also uses the past infinitive, as it was shown in the above-mentioned example I remember to have heard it . Moreover, English uses an infinitive with future passive meaning: the task to be done , the books to be published or the steps to be made. This type of infinitive expresses what should be done in the near future (Vachek 1980: 107)

The most frequent condenser in English is the participle. While participles in Czech are considered as being rather archaic and bookish, English participles are very much alive and commonly used. Another difference between English and Czech participles is the fact that

English participles do not always have a temporary meaning. In Czech, such use would be fairly archaic: Being a stranger in the place, he could not give us the desired information. The third major difference is the circumstance that English participles can also condense those complex sentences in which the subject of the main clause differs from the subject of the dependent clause. One example of this characteristic feature is the sentence All precautions

-21- having been taken, no one could be blamed for the accident . Subject of the main sentence is

“no one” while subject of the dependent clause before condensation is “all precautions”.

English participles, as well as infinitives, can differ from each other by the grammatical categories of tense and voice. They have the capacity to express the present and the past, the active voice and the passive voice. Such capacity considerably increases the condensation power of the English participles which are frequently used for this function (Vachek 1980:

108).

The last important category of condensers is the gerund. This category is similar to the

Czech verbal noun (“podstatné jméno slovesné”) but in some aspects it differs from the Czech category. First of all, it has more verbal features, such as the capacity to govern the object of a noun character which follows it in the same way as the original verb from which the gerund was derived. The verbal noun has the object in the genitive case (“čtení knih” – “reading of books”), while the gerund behaves like a verb (“reading books” – I read books ). Moreover, gerunds can be followed by an adverb in the same way as verbs do: “speaking slowly”,

“speaking loud” – Just as I speak slowly, I speak loud . Gerunds, however, have many features in common with nouns. First of all, it does not distinguish the person or number of the agent or the tense of the action performed. Also, it is frequently preceded by a preposition and qualified by means of the preceding adjective. Both of these features can be observed in the following example: He does not object to my opening the window . Gerunds, as well as infinitives, make it possible for English sentence to save a finite verb form, and therefore to save the use of a dependent clause. (Vachek 1980: 109).

V. THE NOMINAL TENDENCIES OF ENGLISH

The tendency of English towards sentence condensation could be looked at from a broader perspective. By comparing English and Czech, one can observed that the two

-22- languages deal with reality in a different way. Czech has tendency to dissociate the reality into series of actions or processes. English, on the other hand, has a contrary tendency. It handles the reality as a single, basic action or process and considering all other actions or processes as its elements or circumstances (Vachek 1961: 34).

The previously mentioned comparison of the English novel by Katherine Mansfield and its Czech translation reveals another significant aspect in which the two languages differ.

It shows that Czech predicative finite verbs are not only more frequent but also more significant than English verbs. According to Mathesius, English is a language where the important part is played by verbal phrases, by combinations of verbs of general meaning and nominal elements (noun, adjectives or adverbs) which are functioning as qualifiers specifying the general meaning. These verbal phrases are frequently used in situations which are described by a finite verb in Czech. These are some instances of this English phenomenon altogether with their Czech translation: He got hold of it – Zmocnil se toho , We are taking a rest – Odpočíváme , They made a stand – Zastavili se , Get ready – Připrav se , She took a smile – Usmála se (Vachek 1961: 35).

It is obvious from the previous examples that the Czech finite verb could be characterized by its strong dynamism. Czech finite verb fulfills two tasks at the same time.

Not only it is functioning as a semantic centre of gravity but it also serves as an irreplaceable instrument of predication. The English finite verb, on the other hand, seems to be much less dynamic than the Czech finite verb. This can be explained by the frequent shift of the semantic centre of gravity from the verb to the nominal element of the predication and by the fact that the finite verb in English often does not function as an unmatched instrument of predication but rather as something resembling a copula (Vachek 1961: 35). Facts supporting the theory can be found in the comparison of the original Katherine Mansfield’s story and its

Czech translation. In the first example, the verb resembling copula and the nominal element

-23- of the predication are replaced by a finite verb in the Czech translation: And she gave her strange neighing laugh and grimaced at the other women – Zařehtala se jako kůň a ušklíbla se po ostatních ženách . The reduced dynamism of the English verb is certainly the main reason why English sometimes excludes verbs from a sentence altogether. Czech translators then consider it necessary to use verbs in their translation: Black hair, dark blue eyes, red lips, a slow sleepy smile, a fine tennis player, a perfect dancer, and with it all a mystery - Měl

černé vlasy, tmavomodré oči, rudé rty, usmíval se vláčně a ospale, hrál dobře tenis, skvěle tančil a při tom všem vypadal záhadně (Vachek 1961: 35).

The nominal tendencies of the English sentence using the mere copula is frequently in sharp contrast to the Czech sentence with its equivalents using the finite verb forms, as it is so in the following framing clause of the complex sentence: Her lack of vanity, her slang, the way she treated men as though she was one of them, and the fact that she didn’t care twopence about her house and called her servant Gladys “Gladeyes”, was disgraceful – Nic na sebe nedbala, mluvila nevybíravě, k mužům se chovala, jako by k nim patřila, na domácnosti jí ani zbla nezáleželo, své služce Elišce říkala Pampeliška- hanba mluvit (Vachek

1961: 36). There is one interesting point attached to the comparison of these two sentences.

The basic tenor of English is nominal although the English sentence consists of four dependent clauses with finite verb forms, while the basic tenor of Czech sentence is verbal though it is without finite verbs. The extra-linguistic reality is again worded paratactically in

Czech; it is divided into many parallel actions and processes. The same extra-linguistic reality in English is worded in a way that it is framed within one principal clause that is modified by a number of dependent clauses incorporated into it. The translators of the last example understood the tendency of Czech to favour paratactical sentence structure and translated the text according to those principles (Vachek 1961: 36).

-24-

The different attitudes of English and Czech to means of complex condensation and of opposed degrees of dynamism of the finite verb can be proved by another example, English translation of Czech original prose. It is the English version of Karel Čapek’s Letters from

England . The translator tried hard to persevere Čapek’s individual style and the original sentence structure. He could not, however, ignore the nominal tenor of the English sentence.

In the following example, the Czech finite verb is replaced by a condensation effected by a gerund in English: Je ti někdy úzko, jak se cítíš osamělý ve středu těchto vlídných a ochotných lidí – Sometimes you have a sense of uneasiness at feeling so lonely in the midst of these kind and courteous people. The second example shows a total absence of a copula verb in English:

Jejich zamlklost je taková, že ani nenadávají veřejně na vládu, na vlak nebo na daně; je to celkem neveselý, uzavřený lid – Their taciturnity is such that they do not even publicly abuse the Government, the trains or the taxes; on the whole, a joyless and reticent people (Vachek

1961: 36). Doctor Zdeněk Wirth’s historical text that analyzes the vedute of Prague was compared to its Czech translation by Josef Vachek. This text is written in an elaborate manner which requires a strongly nominal language. However, the English translation is still more nominal than the original. Here is one of the examples where it is the case: Výsledek, k němuž tehdy dospěl vývoj renaissanční krajiny od středověkých tuhých bočních kulis a vysokého nadhledu, od neumělé perspektivy a jednotného koloritu, dá se shrnout asi takto:…- The results attained by the Renaissance development of landscape from stiff laterals and high view from above, from inartistic perspective and uniformity of colouring, may be summarized thus:… . These materials from Czech and English sources lead to the conclusion that the moderate amount of nominal constructions in Czech is due to the strong amount of dynamism present in the Czech finite verb, and that the nominal tenor of English sentences is caused by the strongly reduced dynamism of the English verbs. This conclusion holds good also in specialized contexts whose style tends to be more nominal. Even in these texts the tendency

-25- towards nominal expressions appears stronger in English than in Czech ( Vachek 1961:36-

37). VI. ENGLISH AND CZECH SYSTEM OF TENSES

English, however, has nominal tendencies even in situations where a predication of a verbal type is used. English has, in comparison to Czech, a complex system of tenses. The past, present and future tenses must be considered in relation to the progressive and perfect aspects (Quirk 1972: 41). It is important, therefore, to compare the English and Czech system of tenses and emphasize the differences in their semantics.

As for present tense, two basic types are distinguished in English. The first type is expressed with the simple present form and it can be timeless or instantaneous. Example of a sentence in the simple present tense is The sun sets in the west (Quirk 1972: 41). The predication “sets” in the third person is very similar to the Czech verb in Slunce zapadá na západě in that it consists of a verb only. Predications of other types of present tense, on the other hand, considerably differ from their Czech translation. The second type of present tense in English is the present progressive tense. The action is viewed as a process with limited duration, as it is so in the example I am writing with a special pen (Quirk 1972: 41). Every process with limited duration is something very dynamic and that is why this tense is concerning exclusively highly dynamic verbs. Czech, contrary to English, does not distinguish verbs on the basis of the level of their dynamism and can form all tenses from all of them. The Czech translation Píšu teď zvláštním perem has a predication formed from just one verb (“píšu”) and so the form of the predication considerably differs from the English form which consists of a semantically empty auxiliary “to be” and a present participle

(“writing”) which is the most important unit of such predication. In summary, the most dynamic tenses using the most dynamic verbs are expressed verbally in Czech and by present participles in English.

-26-

Similar to the simple present tense is the simple past tense. The simple past tense is a tense expressing that action took place at a particular point of time or that action extended over a period but has been completed already (Quirk 1972: 42). The English simple past tense as well as the Czech past tense has a form of a verb only: John lived in Paris for ten years –

John žil deset let v Paříži . The general abstract meaning of the English simple tenses and their

Czech translations is less dynamic than that of the English progressive tenses and their Czech translations because the progressive tenses always express action with limited duration that is carrying on during some time in the past, present or future. Whereas Czech expresses such action in the same way as slightly less dynamic actions, verbally, English comes to an apparent paradox. It expresses the less dynamic situations verbally (“I visited him”, “They know”) and the most dynamic situations nominally by a present participle (“He’s running”,

“We were playing”). The past progressive tense indicates the limited duration of an action that took place on a particular occasion (Quirk 1972: 45). It also implies continuation in contrast to momentary action (the sentence And suddenly the bomb was exploding is nonsense).

Slightly less dynamic situation is described by the past simple tense. As I have already mentioned, Czech always keeps verbs as major elements in predications and if it emphasizes lower and higher levels of dynamism of a concrete situation it does so by adding different kinds of affixes to the verb: Včera jsme hráli tenis přes dvě hodiny – Včera jsme si zahráli tenis . The first more dynamic sentence must be translated into English by using a present participle, the second one by a simple verb form: We were playing tennis for more than two hours yesterday – We played tennis yesterday .

Similarly to present and past tenses in English we distinguish the future simple and the future progressive tenses. Predication of the future simple tense has an analytical form which is constructed from a future auxiliary “will” and a verb in the form of infinitive, as it is so in the following example You will never regret it (Quirk, Greenbaum 1972: 87-88). The same

-27- situation that is described in English by the future simple tense could be expressed in two ways in Czech. The first way is very similar to the English form because it uses an auxiliary

“to be” and infinitive: Nikdy toho nebudeš litovat . Different English sentences, such as You will certainly win are translated into Czech in a syntactical way, by using a single verb: Určitě zvítězíš . More dynamic situations that will take place in the future are expressed by the future progressive tense in English. Its complex construction is denoting “future-as-a matter-of- course”. It is formed from three parts; the future auxiliaries “will” and “be” and the present participle with –ing ending (Quirk, Greenbaum 1972: 89). As an example of this tense could serve the sentence I will be waiting for you . Sentences of this kind can be translated into

Czech in the same way as examples of the future simple tense, by the analytical form with the auxiliary “být” and infinitive or by syntactical form using a verb only: Budu na tebe čekat –

Počkám na tebe .

Besides progressive aspect, English frequently uses perfect aspect. As far as the present tense is concerned, English uses present perfect and present perfect progressive. The present perfect tense is a tense where an action may be seen as extending over a period up to the present (Quirk 1972: 42). Very often the action did not have to last until present but results of such action still last. What is common for the present perfect tense is the stressing of the present situation, on the present state. One example is the sentence I have broken my leg in which there is an apparent stress on the present state of health of the speaker. Present perfect is formed from the auxiliary “have” and a past participle. The present perfect tense is translated into Czech in the same way as the past tense: Zlomil jsem si nohu . Perfect and progressive aspects are combined in the present progressive tense which has several elements

– the auxiliary “have”, the past participle “been” and the –ing present participle (Quirk,

Greenbaum 1972: 73). As all of the tenses with progressive aspect it is used for describing very dynamic situations, such as this sentence He has been crying all morning . As it is

-28- expressing not just the present state or results of some action as the present perfect simple but the action itself that lasts even in the present it is translated into Czech as a present tense: Celé ráno pláče .

Perfect and progressive aspects can be further combined with future and past tense.

Whereas the future perfect simple tense is used in less dynamic situations which stress the final state in the past as in I will have finished it , the future perfect describes more dynamic situations or processes: Forests will have been disappearing until the next century . The future perfect tense is formed from the auxiliaries “will” and “have” and a past participle, the future perfect progressive from the auxiliaries “will”, “have”, the past participle “been” and the –ing present participle. Sentences in these future tenses are translated into Czech by the Czech future tense, sometimes even in the passive form: Dokončím to – Budu to mít dokončeno . The past perfect simple and past perfect progressive tenses mostly describe situations that happened before other situations. The first of them is formed from the auxiliary “had” and a past participle ( They had gone there ), the second one from the auxiliary “had”, the past participle “been” and the present participle ending with –ing ( They had been going there ).

They are translated as the Czech past tense ( Šli tam ). These examples show that English, contrary to Czech, has a highly complex system of tenses and that the form by which the reality is described depends on the level of dynamism and minor details of the character of the described situation.

VII. THE CHART OF DYNAMISM:

ENGLISH AND CZECH PREDICATIONS

As my task was to compare English and Czech predications on the basis of dynamism,

I have chosen to analyze predications in two original literary works and in their translations. I compared Czech predications with their counterparts translated into English and, vice versa,

-29-

English predications with the correspondent predications translated into Czech. The comparison was based on the dynamism of the main part of the predication. For this purpose,

I have created a chart which shows the hierarchy of dynamism in predications. As English and

Czech are languages that differ considerably, the two categories in the English and Czech part of the chart with the equal level of dynamism do not have to be fully correspondent. One reason for that is the fact that grammatical categories in English differ from those in Czech. In spite of this, I have found many common features in the corresponding categories.

The chart that illustrates the hierarchy of dynamism in predications consists of twelve categories. Predications belonging to the same category have similar levels of dynamism. The hierarchical structure means that the categories are arranged in a descending way, from the most dynamic category up to the least dynamic one. The categories, which include the

English and the Czech part, are arranged in this way: 1. Verb only/ Verb only, 2. Infinitive in a predication/ Infinitive in a predication, 3. Non-predicative infinitive/ Non-predicative infinitive, 4. Past participle in a predication/ Passive in a predication (“Pasívum opisné”), 5.

Non-predicative past participle/ Non-predicative passive (“Pasívum opisné”), 6. Present participle in a predication/ Verbal adjective in a predication (“Přídavné jméno slovesné”),

7. Non-predicative present participle/ Non-predicative participle (“Přechodník přítomný, minulý”), 8. Copula-like verb with adjective/ Copula-like verb with adjective, 9. Copula-like verb with adverb/ Copula-like verb with adverb, 10. Predicative and non-predicative gerund/

Predicative and non-predicative verbal noun (“podstatné jméno slovesné”), 11. Copula-like verb with noun, pronoun or preposition/ Copula-like verb with noun, pronoun or preposition,

12. Non-verbal construction/ Non-verbal construction.

-30-

English and Czech Predications: The Chart of Dynamism

English Czech

1. A VERB ONLY 1. A VERB ONLY

VERB + 0,-ed, -s VERB + -X, jsem, se, jsem se, 0 Don’t, Doesn’t, Didn’t + VERB VERB (p.z.) + -l (a, i, y) + “by” Did, Do + VERB Naučím se, znali, spím, věděla jsem I learn, they learned, she knows Znali by, uviděla bych I don’t know

2. INFINITIVE 2. INFINITIVE

MODAL VERB + VERB FUTURE TENSE of „BÝT“+VERB+ -t AUXILIARY + VERB MODAL VERB + VERB + -t 1. INFINITIVE I must sleep, they will study, Musím spát, budou se učit, I mustn’t speak, let me go Nesmím mluvit

3. NON -PREDICATIVE 3. NON-PREDICATIVE INFINITIVE INFINITIVE

TO + VERB VERB + -t

To think that.., (I wanted) to see… Vědět, že…, ….(Slyšel jsem) ho zpívat

4. PAST PARTICIPLE 4. PASSIVE (PASÍVUM OPISNÉ ) HAVE, HAS, HAD, 0 + VERB + -ed, PP HAVE,HAS,HAD+BEEN+VERB+-ed, PP “TO BE”+VERB+-ed, PP “TO BE”, 0 + BEING + VERB + -ed, PP “BÝT”+ VERB + -n (o, a, i, y) BEING+ VERB + -ed, PP “BÝT”+ VERB+ -t (o, a, i, y) MODAL V.+HAVE, HAS+VERB+-ed,PP MODAL V.+ BE +VERB+-ed,PP M.V.+HAVE,HAS+BEEN+VERB+-ed,PP Je určen, bylo odstartováno, Byli vyslechnuti, I have learned, They had been given,. Bylo zraněno She is being given, I’m caught, we should’ve been taught

-31-

5. NON -PREDICATIVE 5. NON -PREDICATIVE PAST PARTICIPLE PASSIVE (PASÍVUM OPISNÉ )

HAVING+VERB+-ed,PP HAVING + BEEN + VERB+ -ed, PP VERB + -n (o, a, i, y) BEING+ VERB + -ed, PP VERB + -t (o, a, i, y) VERB + -ed, PP

Having finished … Having been praised… Vyslechnut… Being caught by his parents… Poníženi.. Caught by his parents…

6. PRESENT PARTICIPLE 6 . VERBAL ADJECTIVE

“TO BE”, 0 + VERB+ -ing “BÝT” + VERB + -ící HAVE, HAS, HAD+ BEEN+VERB+-ing “BÝT” + VERB + -vší, -vavší

I am learning, He is standing Byli spící They’ve been waiting

7 . NON -PREDICATIVE 7. NON -PREDICATIV E PRESENT PARTICIPLE PARTICIPLE, (PŘECHODNÍK

PŘÍTOMNÝ, MINULÝ )

VERB+ -ing VERB + -a, ouc, ouce, e, jíc jíce , VERB + -0, ši, še, v, vši, vše

Learning the news… Nesa, zpívajíc Standing… Vynesši, ukloniv se, zbudivše se

-32-

8. COPULA -LIKE VERB 8. COPU LA -LIKE VERB WITH ADJECTIVE WITH ADJECTIVE

COPULA-LIKE VERB + ADJECTIVE COPULA-LIKE VERB + ADJECTIVE

It got warm, he was nice Je šťastný, byl milý

9. COPULA -LIKE VERB 9. COPULA -LIKE VERB WITH ADVERB WITH ADVERB

COPULA-LIKE VERB + ADVERB COPULA-LIKE VERB + ADVERB

It was yesterday, he made straight Je horko, to je dobře

10. PREDICATIVE, 10. PREDICATIVE, NON-PREDICATIVE GERUND NON-PREDICATIVE VERBAL NOUN AUXILIARY + GERUND COPULA-LIKE VERB+ GERUND COPULA-LIKE VERB+VERBAL NOUN

Keep on running To bylo znehodnocení... That’s not singing

11. COPULA –LIKE VERB 11. COPULA-LIKE VERB WITH WITH NOUN, PRONOUN, NOUN,

PREPOSITION PRONOUN, PREPOSITION

COPULA-LIKE VERB + NOUN, COPULA VERB+ NOUN, PRONOUN, PRONOUN, PREPOSITION PREPOSITION

There is a book, it’s for her, they are mine Byli jsme studenty, je tvoje, budou s ní

12. NONVERBAL CONSTRUCTION 12. NONVERBAL CONSTRUCTION

If the English construction is If the Czech construction is without without any verb any verb

Fire! ( for Hoří! ) Gól! ( for Scores!)

-33-

I am going now to explain in brief the reasons why I have created just these categories and according to what qualities I have grouped them the way I have. The first category consists of all predications with a verb only, or in other words, of those predications that have been mostly formed in the syntactical not the analytical way. As dynamism is not scattered on several units but it lies only on one predicative element, the predication is then characterized by strong dynamism.

Just a little less dynamic is the category Infinitive in a predication . Though the existence of the auxiliary lessens the dynamism of the whole predication, its main part, the infinitive, still keeps a high level of dynamism because the auxiliary is semantically vague.

This kind of infinitive is common in English and Czech as well: “will go”, “must go” – “bude chodit”, “musí jít”.

There are examples where non-predicative infinitive in one language replaces the predication of a subordinary clause in the other one. Such infinitive is certainly less dynamic than the predicative one because it does not have the ability to express the grammatical categories of a verb (such as tense, person, number) and therefore, is more static. This is obvious from these two examples in Czech: Potřebuji, abych zítra mohla dlouho spát –

Potřebuji zítra dlouho spát . The auxiliary “moci” supplies the information about grammatical categories (past tense, feminine gender, singular) while the verb “spát” displays the meaning.

In the second example, on the other hand, such information is missing and the form is constant. Similar examples could be found in English: I’ll leave the book on the table so that you could look at it – I’ll leave the book on the table for you to look at it . The modal auxiliaries do not have just a grammatical function but they also modify the meaning of the infinitive. Non-predicative infinitives are lacking this feature as well.

The fourth category of my chart is called Past participle (pasívum opisné ) in a predication . It is a more static category because there is an emphasis on the resulting state of

-34- some action, on the present state: I have written my homework (It is finished now), I had my hair cut , They are hurt , Voják byl raněn . Non-predicative present participle (pasívum opisné) has a similar meaning but it is missing the verb, and therefore is more nominal ( Having written my homework, I went to bed ). “Pasívum opisné” in Czech can have the function of a sentence condenser as well: Odešel raněn jejím odmítnutím .

The next category is called Predicative present participle / verbal adjective .

Predication of this category consists of the auxiliary “to be” and of the main part, the present participle that is very similar to an adjective: It was the running man who was also screaming.

The Czech verbal adjective is also similar to an adjective but it is not really used. In English this category consists of predications in the progressive aspect which are used for describing the most dynamic situations but their form considerably lessens their dynamism. Reasons for considering predications of a progressive aspect not highly dynamic I will explain later. Non- predicative present participle (as well as “přechodník” in Czech) is lacking the verb “to be” and therefore, is more static than predication of the previous category as “the running man” of the previous example. Whereas the English participle of this category is just in the present tense, the Czech “přechodník” belonging here is in the present tense as well as in the past tense. Both of them have similar function, qualities (they are distinguished according to person and number) and similar form. Non-predicative present participle in English is not distinguished according to person and number as the Czech “přechodník”, which, altogether with the previously mentioned lack of the auxiliary “to be”, makes it less dynamic and more distinctive from the predicative present participle.

The rest of the categories do not have their non-predicative counterparts. The following category, according to their hierarchy, is the category Copula-like verb with adjective . Adjective, contrary to previous categories, have little in common with verbs and it is a truly nominal element – that is why it is standing lower than the past or present

-35- participles. The most frequent copula-like verb in English as well as in Czech the auxiliary “to be” (“být”).

Still lower than adjectives stand the predication that is made of Copula-like verb and adverb . The fact that adverbs are less dynamic than adjectives is more obvious from Czech than English. In Czech, the form of the adjectives change according to gender, person and number of the noun, similarly to verbs ( Silný vítr ustal – Silná vichřice ustala ), whereas adverbs have an unchangeable static form.

The following category is called Copula-like verb with gerund/ verbal noun . Gerund has some features in common with verbs and that is why it is more dynamic than a noun but it also has even more features in common with nouns and that makes it less dynamic than adjective and adverb. Its Czech counterpart could be a verbal noun (“podstatné jméno slovesné”) which is just a little less dynamic than a gerund (Vachek 1980: 109)

The category, characterized by very little dynamism, is the Copula-like verb with noun, pronoun or preposition . These parts of speech are of a truly nominal character. There are no considerable differences between predications of this category in English and Czech.

The last and the least nominal category is the one called Non-verbal construction . This category includes those non-verbal constructions which replace predications with a verb in the second language. One example of such phenomenon is the English non-predicative clause

Fire! (noun), which can be translated into Czech by the clause Hoří! or Pal(te) ! (verb). Both of these sentences are truly verbal, whereas the English original clause belongs to the least dynamic category, the category of non-verbal constructions.

As I have already explained the hierarchical structure of my chart, now I am going to analyze each category in more detail and concentrate on the border cases and rather complex examples of each category.

-36-

1. A VERB ONLY 1. A VERB ONLY

VERB + 0,-ed, -s VERB + -X, jsem, se, jsem se, 0 Don’t, Doesn’t, Didn’t + VERB VERB (p.z.) + -l (a, i, y) + “by” Did, Do + VERB Naučím se, znali, spím, věděla jsem Znali by, uviděla bych I learn, they learned, she knows I don’t know

The first category of predications that consist of a verb only is maybe the least complicated one. The English examples of this category could be “I learn”, “they learned”,

“she knows”, in other words, predications of the present simple and the past simple tense. In

Czech, however, the predications could be of the present, past and the future tense and also in conditional: “naučím se“, “znali”, “věděla jsem”, “znali by”, “uviděla bych”. A question could be raised why I have included Czech predications of the first and the second person of the past tense or those in conditional when they do not consist of a verb only but also of an auxiliary (“viděla bych”, “šli jsme”) as well as the English predications with auxiliaries

“did”, “do”, “does” (for questions or for the stressing function in other sentences) and with the negative primary auxiliaries “do not”, “does not” or “did not” (for negative sentences) (Quirk

1972: 77). It is because the meaning of these predications lies on the verbal element and the auxiliary has merely a grammatical function so that it can not lessen dynamism of the verb

(“jsme” – first person, “bys” – second person, “don’t” – negative, “do” - question). This is incomparable with the modal auxiliaries of the predications with infinitive, such as should go or may go which have a certain amount of semantic meaning and lessen the ruling position of the main part. On the basis of these facts I have decided to include in the first category also the above-mentioned Czech predications of the past tense and the conditional as well as the

English predications with the primary auxiliaries that consist of two lexical items.

2. INFINITIVE 2. INFINITIVE

MODAL VERB + VERB FUTURE TENSE of „BÝT“+VERB+ -t AUXILIARY + VERB MODAL VERB + VERB + -t

I must sleep, they will study, Musím spát, budou se učit, I mustn’t speak, let me go Nesmím mluvit

-37-

Predications with modal auxiliaries that I have just mentioned belong to the category of the infinitive. Besides them, there are other constructions in English that should be included in this category. These are some examples of the English predications belonging to this category: “mustn’t speak”, “will study”, “should go”. Besides such simple constructions there exist other more complicated ones. Now I am going to mention some of those rather complex examples in order to show what I have included in this category and what I have included in a different category. These are the two of them: I am going to go there (if the

Czech counterpart is Chystám se tam jít , not Chystám se, že tam půjdu ) and He was trying to stop them ( Zkoušel je zastavit ). Predication of sentences similar to I am going to go there I have included in this infinitive category. As two main parts are found in this predication

(present participle and infinitive), it is important to realize whether one of them is not resembling a copula by lacking a semantic value. If this is the case, then the predication should belong to the right category according to the full-fledged verb. If it is not the case, always the first verb should be taken into consideration. Because the construction “to be going to” is not independent and always needs a full-fledged verb to be followed by, the determination of the category should be done on the basis of the second part of the predication which is the infinitive “to go”. The second example He was trying to stop them I have chosen for its structure that is similar to the first one. Here, however the both parts have a full-fledged verb and so the category must be chosen according to the first part (“was trying”). Though the examples look similar, the first one belongs to the infinitive category and the second one to the category of the present participle. I have used the same rules for sentences in Czech.

Predication of the sentence Musím se najíst should, therefore, belong to the infinitive category whereas the one Rozhodla se mu pomoct to the verb only category.

-38-

3. NON -PREDICATIVE 3. NON-PREDICATIVE INFINITIVE INFINITIVE

TO + VERB VERB + -t

To think that.., (I wanted) to see… Vědět, že…, ….(Slyšel jsem) ho zpívat

The next category, Non-predicative infinitive , is made for those cases, where a predication in one language is replaced by a mere infinitive. Such phenomenon is called condensation. The most frequent situation where it occurs is when a Czech dependent clause is translated into English by a non-predicative infinitive: John persuaded them to stay longer

– John je přemluvil, aby zůstali déle (Vachek 1980: 107). Examples of the opposite phenomenon where a dependent clause in English would have its counterpart in a non- predicative infinitive are not found easily. One example of a sentence where such translation is possible could be the following one: I would come earlier if I knew that – Vědět to, přijdu dříve . Those cases where an English dependent clause would be translated as a Czech non- predicative infinitive (or vice versa, a Czech non-predicative infinitive would be translated as an English dependent clause) are very rare.

4. PAST PARTICIPLE 4. PASSIVE (PASÍVUM OPISNÉ ) HAVE, HAS, HAD, 0 + VERB + -ed, PP HAVE,HAS,HAD+BEEN+VERB+-ed, PP

“TO BE”+VERB+-ed, PP “TO BE”, 0 + BEING + VERB + -ed, PP “BÝT”+ VERB + -n (o, a, i, y) BEING+ VERB + -ed, PP “BÝT”+ VERB+ -t (o, a, i, y) MODAL V.+HAVE, HAS+VERB+-ed,PP

MODAL V.+ BE +VERB+-ed,PP M.V.+HAVE,HAS+BEEN+VERB+-ed,PP Je určen, bylo odstartováno, I have learned, Byli vyslechnuti, They had been given,. Bylo zraněno

She is being given, I’m caught, we should’ve been taught

-39-

The following lower category is called Past participle in a predication . Its corresponding category in Czech is “pasívum opisné”. If we concentrate at first on the predications in English, it must be noted that the category in English is very rich. Past participles are used for expressing the present perfect tense (simple and progressive), past perfect tense (simple and progressive), future perfect tense (simple and progressive), the conditional perfect and also in the passive form for different aspects and tenses (Quirk 1972:

70-74). These are just some examples of sentences with the past participle: I have learned it already , They had been waiting for us , She will have finished it tomorrow , He should have come later . It is important to explain why I have included in this category predications of a perfect aspect and made them less dynamic than, for example, predications of the simple past tense. I have not done so barely on the basis of the form which is constructed from the past participle. In this category, passives are to some extent less dynamic than predications of a perfect aspect but they also have a lot of features in common with them. Let us consider at first why passives should be less dynamic than active predications. Passives do not just stress the action they denote but they also put a stress on the resulting state of the action. That is why passive participles are often distinguished from state-denoting adjectives only with a great difficulty, such as in the sentence I am really surprised . If passives had the same level of dynamism as their active counterparts ( They surprised me ) it would not be so difficult to distinguish them from adjectives. Predications of the present perfect tense are similar to predications of the passive voice which are also formed from past participles. Both of them stress the resulting state of the action in the present ( I have discovered the truth, I am surprised by this offer ) in the past ( I had discovered the truth , I was surprised by his offer ) or in the future ( I will have discovered the truth, I will be surprised if they make such offer ).

There is a semantic difference between the two following sentences: I watched the film yesterday and I have watched the film . The first sentence undoubtedly stresses the action of

-40-

“watching the film”. The second sentence, on the other hand, stresses mainly the result of that watching, the speaker’s knowledge of the film, not primarily the action. It is not important when or how the action took place, it is not developed by other means (yesterday, carefully) because the crucial thing is the resulting state of “being acknowledged with it now”. This meaning is supported by the form which can not be used in a truly dynamic context and which is used in constructions with a passive meaning, such as I had my hair cut or John has it finished already . The similarity of form (and meaning to a leader extent) can be explained. It originated in the old English period with the help of the verb “habban” (“have”) and it had the truly static meaning expressing the result of the action. The following example is a sentence from the famous literary work “Beowulf” from the twelfth century: Bēowulf hæfÞ cempan

Зecorene meant Beowulf has his warriors chosen (in Czech: Beowulf má vybrané bojovníky ).

The perfect aspect then originated in order to denote almost merely the resulting state of the action and became more dynamic only later (Vachek, 1977: 89-90). Its function of stressing the resulting state, however, has not disappeared. Present perfect, for example, is never used for telling stories because they always stress what happened. If someone wants to stress, in contrast, the present state, results of what happened, they will use the present perfect tense:

And suddenly I fell down from the tree and broken my leg – I can’t come, I’ve broken my leg .

The Czech “pasívum opisné” is being used less frequently because it occurs merely as a part of the passive with auxiliaries “být” or “mít” as it is so in the following examples: Je zvolen do čela strany, Bylo odstartováno, Mám to už přečteno .

I am going to explain again what I have included in the past participle category and what I have placed into different categories. First of all, it is important to analyze some of the various complex constructions. In the following example She is being given presents all the time , we can find two participles – the present participle (“being”) and the past participle

(“given”). The present participle indicates a progressive aspect while the past participle

-41- indicates the passive. Because the present participle has a merely grammatical function

(indicating the progressive aspect) and the past participle has in addition a semantic function

(the meaning of “to give”), it is standing higher and determining the category of the whole predication – the past participle.

A clear distinction must be made between past participles and adjectives. Past participles have some features in common with adjectives and it is sometimes difficult to distinguish them from each other. The most important thing is to realize that the distinction can not be made on the basis of the form of concrete lexical items but it must be made on the basis of the context in which they occur. Thus it is not possible to say whether the word

“broken” is a past participle or an adjective. This word, like many others, can be used as a past participle as well as an adjective. In the sentence I had my window broken last night it is functioning as a past participle in the passive, whereas in the sentence He has a broken heart it is functioning as an adjective. Linguists have found some rules for indicating the adjectival status of the past participle, as it was described in the American Heritage book of English usage . If the past participle is followed by a “by prepositional phrase” it can not be an adjective but it is a past participle. The first sentence, for example, could be enlarged in the following way: I had my window broken by hooligans last night . “Broken” here, therefore, can not be an adjective. It is impossible, however, to say * He has a broken heart by Jane or

*He has a broken by Jane heart which indicates that “broken” here is an adjective. If the word stands before the noun it modifies, then it should be an adjective, such as “stolen money” or “a happily married couple”. Also, if the verb is preceded by the verb “seem”, it is rather an adjective than a participle, as it is so in this sentence: He seems concerned about you . Another feature indicating an adjective is the possibility of the word to be compared, to exist in the comparative and the superlative. In the sentence We are even more encouraged now , “encouraged” functions as an adjective. The last indicator of adjectives is the situation

-42- when the word is modified by “very”. It is so in the sentence They are very worried about this . Those were the most useful ways how to distinguish adjectives with the –ed endings from past participles (Pickett, 1996).

If we should concentrate on the same problematic in Czech, it would be necessary to say that similar problems are found there as well. First group of adjectives with the endings –

ý/í, -á, -é is recognized easily. Though they differ sometimes from the passives (“pasívum opisné”), as far as the form is concerned, merely by the length of the ending vowel, there is a considerable difference in semantics. “Pasívum opisné” is used in cases where the speaker or writer wants to stress the direct contrast between the passivity and activity ( Problém je vyřešen ) and it emphasizes both the resulting state and the action that was done by someone that is already known from the context or is unimportant. Adjectives, on the other hand, are used when the speaker wants to emphasize merely the quality or state of the noun ( Problém je vyřešený ). The difference is easily recognized in expressions where numerals are present, such as in these two sentences: Pět vojáků bylo raněno (action) – Pět vojáků bylo raněných

(merely state) (Šmilauer 1966: 150-151). As I have already mentioned, the first group of adjectives is easily distinguished from passives by their endings. There is a second group of adjectives, however, which could be misleading due to the adjectival form that is similar to those of passive by the lack of the vowel ending. These are examples of such adjectives: hotov, mlád, stár, mrtev, sláb . Such adjectives have nothing in common with passives because they are mere archaic forms of usual adjectives ( hotový, mladý, starý, mrtvý, slabý ). Contrary to passives they are not formed from a verb ( umrtven – umrtvit, mrtev - ? ), and therefore they could not be changed according to mode ( umrtven, umrtvován – mrtev, ? ) which is the proof of their lack of dynamism. Another distinctive feature is the fact that they are hardly found in the feminine or neutral gender, whereas the existence of passives in these genders is common.

Here is the comparison: Je mlád – ?Je mláda?, Je sláb - ?Je slába? : Je zraněn – Je zraněna ,

-43-

Je oslaben – Je oslabena ) (Grepl 1986: 225). Thus the difference between passives (“pasívum trpné”) and adjectives in Czech is considerable – passives stress action as well, and therefore are more dynamic than adjectives that stress merely the resulting state.

6. NON -PREDICATIVE 6. NON -PREDICATIVE

PAST PARTICIPLE PASSIVE

(PASÍVUM OPISNÉ )

HAVING+VERB+-ed,PP HAVING + BEEN + VERB+ -ed, PP VERB + -n (o, a, i, y) BEING+ VERB + -ed, PP VERB + -t (o, a, i, y) VERB + -ed, PP

Having finished … Having been praised… Vyslechnut… Poníženi.. Being caught by his parents… Caught by his parents…

The next category is called Non-predicative past participle/ “pasívum opisné” . In my chart this category represents those constructions that replace a dependent clause in the second language. In English it is used in passive constructions ( Surprised by their reaction he stopped talking ), as well as in active constructions ( Having written the letter he went to bed ).

Passive constructions have these forms: being written and having been written . The two forms of active constructions are the following ones: having written , written (Dušková 1994: 270).

The Czech “pasívum opisné” hardly ever replaces a dependent clause. As passives in Czech are all highly formal and some of them even archaic, the use of passives in non-predicative constructions is always bookish (Vachek 1980: 108). This is one such example: Raněni náhlou ztrátou přítele tam mlčky seděli.

-44-

6. PRESENT PARTICIPLE 6 . VERBAL ADJECTIVE

“TO BE”, 0 + VERB+ -ing “BÝT” + VERB + -ící HAVE, HAS, HAD+ BEEN+VERB+-ing “BÝT” + VERB + -vší, -vavší

I am learning, He is standing Byli spící They’ve been waiting

The category of the Present participle/ Verbal adjective in a predication deserves a detailed explanation because the form of the predications is in sharp contrast to the meaning.

If we take into account merely the abstract meaning of any English sentence with the progressive aspect it would then be very dynamic. It is so because English uses this aspect merely with highly dynamic verbs. It is not possible, for example, to say *they are knowing because the verb “to know” has a very low level of dynamism. This abstract meaning which is the same for any language, however, can not fully embrace reality which is always modified by its concrete expression in language. The most dynamic situations in English are, therefore, expressed by two static elements – a semantically void verb “to be” and a present participle which belongs to the group of nouns. The reason why this happened lies in the history of

English. The whole system of tenses with progressive aspect was formed only gradually. In

Old English period it did not exist. The sentence I am fighting originated from ic eom on feohtunge – I am at fight , later changed into I am a-fighting (Vachek 1980: 73). The form was, therefore, even less dynamic than it is at the present time. Most linguists consider the form as having no impact on the dynamism. The sentence I am fighting certainly does not have nowadays the literary meaning of the form. In spite of this, such predications behave in a different way than the most dynamic predications in Czech and there are some indications that the form lessens the dynamism to some extent. As the verb “to be” in the predication has

-45- merely a grammatical function, the whole semantic value is on the present participle, on the truly nominal element. This fact can not be without any impact on the dynamism. It is reflected, for example, in a frequent and easy change of a sentence with a progressive aspect into a semi-clausal construction using a present participle as a sentence condenser. According to Vachek, the most important part in the condensing activity is played by nominal elements, what is in this case a present participle (Vachek 1980: 107). In the following sentence I saw

John while he was running to school the second clause is supposed to be more dynamic than the first one because it describes the most dynamic situation – a process with limited duration.

If it was translated into Czech it would be so without any doubt because both of the predications then would be truly verbal: Viděl jsem Johna, když utíkal do školy . In English, however, the sentence can be easily changed into I saw John running to school . If the second predication was so dynamic how could it be so easily changed into a truly static semi-clausal structure and, in addition, almost without any change in the meaning? The only explanation is that the form has already lessened the dynamism of the predication to such extent that there is not such a considerable difference between a tense with progressive aspect and a non- predicative present participle. The semantic importance of the present participle in progressive tenses also frequently erases the differences between condensing present participles and tenses in progressive aspect. In the following example from Main Street the participle “taking” could and could not be a part of the present progressive tense: I’m here quite often – taking patients to hospitals for majors, and so on (20). It could be a part of “I’m taking” so that the speaker did not have to repeat “I’m” or it could be a more independent unit, a present participle “taking”. No matter what it is, the meaning and the level of dynamism do not change rapidly. In other words, there is not a major difference between a predication of a progressive tense and a non-predicative present participle because the

-46- nominal participial form of the progressive aspect considerably lessened the dynamism of the predication so that it resembles nominal elements.

Present participles are even more similar to adjectives than past participles. One proof is the fact that a number of adjectives with the –ing ending is higher than that of –ed ending.

The most important thing that present participles have in common with adjectives is their primary function to further specify the noun they modify. The present participles can be used attributively as adjectives. Contrary to –ing adjectives, they are formed from a commonly used verb. If participles are not a part of some predication or if they do not function as sentence condenser but are used attributively they are hardly distinguished from adjectives.

Their higher dynamism lies in the fact that they refer to actions that are being performed by the things described. The following examples show present participles with the verbs they are derived from: the falling star – to fall , the crying child – to cry , the barking dog – to bark .

These examples indicate that the agent ( star, child, dog ) is performing some action (of falling, crying, barking ) (Picket 1996). Adjectives, on the other hand, can not refer to action: a fascinating film , an interesting hobby . Participles of the progressive aspect in English are on the whole more dynamic than Czech verbal adjectives but they have in common with them the possibility of being changed into elements in the attributive position because of their similarity to adjectives. A verbal adjective is easily distinguished from an adjective by the characteristic endings –ící, -vší, -vavší (Komárek 1986: 142). Though the last two endings

(-vší, -vavší) refer to the past, verbal adjectives of this kind are in other ways similar to those expressing the present. Examples of some of the verbal adjectives in Czech could be the following ones: vykonávající, spící, udělavší . In Czech, however, verbal adjectives are not used predicatively and that is why this category is almost empty. If we concentrate on English present participles in a predication, it would be necessary to look at some rather complex examples. Let us consider where the following examples should belong to: I am going to go

-47- there , He was trying to stop them , That’s not real singin g, it’s playback , It was Tom singing .

The first two examples have been analyzed already. According to the previously mentioned rules, the predication of I am going to go there belongs to the infinitive category and the sentence He was trying to stop them to this, present participle category of the chart. The sentence That’s not real singin g, it’s playback has two predications and it is the first one I am going to concentrate on. Here, the predication “is not real singing” has its main part in

“singing”. Though it has the same form as, for example, the present participle in Tom is singing , it does not modify the noun and have a nominal function instead. That is why this type of predication would belong to the category auxiliary with gerund. The last sentence also contains the word form “singing”: It was Tom singing . In this example “singing” modifies the noun and it is undoubtedly a present participle. However, it has a function of a sentence condenser there, as the original sentence would be It was Tom who was singing . As there is a present participle, the category it should belong to would depend on the Czech translation

(whether there is a predicative or non-predicative present participle).

7 . NON -PREDICATIVE 7. NON -PREDICATIVE PRESENT PARTICIPLE PARTICIPLE, (PŘECHODNÍK

PŘÍTOMNÝ, MINULÝ )

VERB+ -ing VERB + -a, ouc, ouce, e, jíc , jíce

VERB + -0, ši, še, v, vši, vše

Learning the news… Nesa, zpívajíc Standing… Vynesši, ukloniv se, zbudivše se

The next category, Non-predicative present participle/ “přechodník přítomný, minulý” , exists in English as well as in Czech. The form is identical to that of a present

-48- participle but without the auxiliary. The following example shows its form and function of a sentence condenser in English: Standing in the rain I saw him approaching me – Když jsem stála v dešti, viděla jsem ho, jak ke mně přichází. There are two non-predicative present participles in the English sentence (“standing”, “approaching”). A Czech participle is called

“přechodník” and it could be in the present as well as in the past tense. Past participle in

Czech has the level of dynamism identical with a present participle in English due to their similar function and position in a sentence. A present participle has the following characteristic endings: -a, -ouc, -ouce, -e, -jíc, -jíce (depending on the person, gender and number), whilst past participles have the following ending: -0, -ši, -še, -v, -vši, -vše (also depending on the person, gender and number). These examples show participles in Czech sentences: Vydávala rozkazy, sedíc v křesle jako královna , Děkovala, sklánějíc hlavu .

(Komárek 1986: 153). Participles in Czech, contrary to English, seem rather archaic and are scarcely used (Vachek 1980: 108).

8. COPULA -LIKE VERB 8. COPULA -LIKE VERB WITH ADJECTIVE WITH ADJECTIVE

COPULA-LIKE VERB + ADJECTIVE COPULA-LIKE VERB + ADJECTIVE

It got warm, he was nice Je šťastný, byl milý

Copula-like verb with adjective is a category of predications less dynamic than those with participles. An adjective is a nominal element as well as a noun. This kind of predication takes part in the following examples: Suddenly he got angry , They were very nice to us . Verbs of such constructions have hardly recognizable semantic function and they do not considerably differ from a copula. A similar construction He is such a nice guy would not have a predication of this kind because the main part would be represented by the noun “guy”, not by the adjective “nice”. Such predication would then belong to the category copula-like verb with noun in my chart. Structure of this predication in Czech is almost identical with that

-49- of English. The following sentences could serve as examples of such predication: Jeho přátelé jsou velmi milí , Celý večer byla zamlklá . The biggest difference lies in the fact that almost the only copula-like verb that is used in predications of this category in Czech is the verb “to be”.

English, however, has a wider range of copula verbs: “be”, “get”, “go”, “come” and others

(He went wild , I got hungry ). A last thing should be added as far as this category is concerned.

Adjectives in English, as well as in Czech, that should belong there do not have an identical level of dynamism. Its level varies to a large extent even within one category. Those differences, however, are not huge enough to form other categories. In Czech, for example, exist different kinds of participles (transformed into adjectives) that are little more dynamic than other adjectives because they were formed from verbs. These are the adjectival participles (“zpřídavnělé příčestí činné”) and the adjectival participles of the passive mode with the long vowel endings (“zpřídavnělé příčestí trpné”). The following examples belong to the first group: “spadlý”, “zvadlý”, “obrostlý”, “rozpadlý. Their characteristic ending is –lý,

-lá, -lé, -lí, -lé, -lá (depending on the person, gender and number). These examples represent the second group: “napsaný”, “zaplacený”, “vychovaný”, “upečený”, “krytý”, “mletý”. The endings –ný, -ná, -né, -ní, -né, -ná or –tý, -tá, -té, -tí, -té, -tá (depending again on the person, gender and number) are common for this group (Komárek 1986: 142-147). There are important reasons, in my opinion, why they do not deserve a special category and should be included in the category for adjectives instead. First of all, their form does not differ from that of ordinary adjectives (“smělý” – “zvadlý”, “krásný” – “vychovaný”, “zlatý” – “krytý”), and therefore they are hardly recognizable from other adjectives. What is even more, their function is identical with that of adjectives – they specify a quality or state of the noun it precedes. The speaker or writer does not realize their verbal origin when using them, at least in the majority of cases. That is due to the fact that they do not refer to the action but to the quality or state that is a result of that action. The difference is obvious from the following

-50- examples: Chlapec je postižený (referring to the boy’s physical state) – Chlapec je postižen

(referring to what happened to him and to his physical state). Whereas the second sentence would need specification, the first one sounds natural because it has one specification already

– “postižený chlapec”. Other examples only prove that: Stavba je krytá – Stavba je kryta

(pevnou střechou ), Chlapec je postižený – Chlapec je postižen ( Downovým syndromem ), Byla zavřená – Byla zavřena ( do polepšovny ). Though adjectives of the two types (“zpřídavnělé příčestí trpné” and “zpřídavnělé příčestí činné” with the long vowel ending) are, on the basis of their verbal origin, a little more dynamic than others, the difference is insignificant due to the process of adjectivization that was even easier because of the form that is identical to ordinary adjectives. The fact that English adjectives are more dynamic than the Czech ones has been already analyzed. While the Czech adjectives can denote only a stable quality or a long-time state, their English counterparts have the ability to denote a momentary situation:

They are fairly critical of the new plan – K novému plánu se staví kriticky (Mathesius 1961:

106). Whereas the momentary state could be expressed by an adjective in English, the same is not possible in Czech. This, however, does not mean that English adjectives could be used instead of verbs in majority of cases.

9. COPULA -LIKE VERB 9. COPULA -LIKE VERB WITH ADVERB WITH ADVERB

COPULA-LIKE VERB + ADVERB COPULA-LIKE VERB + ADVERB

It was yesterday, he made straight Je horko, to je dobře

The category Copula-like verb with adjective is followed by the category Copula-like verb with adverb . Structure of a predication with adverb in English is very similar to that in

Czech. The most frequent copula verb in both of the languages is “to be” – “být”. English adverbs, however, are used less frequently in predications than Czech adverbs. Very often a

-51-

Czech adverb is replaced by an English adjective in the translation: The house is deep in the woods – Dům je hluboko v lesích , He was cold – Bylo mu chladno. These are some examples of adverbs in predication in English: He made straight , The party was yesterday . The English copula-like verbs as a part of a predication are, again, richer in numbers than the Czech ones.

The Czech verb “to be” is the only one worth mentioning.

10. PREDICATIVE, 10. PREDICATIVE, NON-PREDICATIVE GERUND NON-PREDICATIVE

VERBAL NOUN AUXILIARY + GERUND COPULA-LIKE VERB+ GERUND COPULA-LIKE VERB+VERBAL NOUN

Keep on running To bylo znehodnocení snah… That’s not singing

The next category is called Predicative or non-predicative gerund/ verbal noun .

Gerunds have a form of a noun but they are derived from a verb and have some features in common with them, as I have already mentioned. Gerunds have the same form as present participles but they are more nominal, resembling a noun. They can be used as sentence condensers but mainly in English: She decided upon studying law – Rozhodla se, že bude studovat práva . They can be a part of a predication as well: Keep on running! There are various copula-like verbs which are followed by gerunds: “carry on”, “go”, “come” and many others. Gerunds are similar to Czech verbal nouns. If they are in a predication, almost the only copula-like verb that is a part of a predication is again “to be”.

It may be necessary to explain one more time what I have included to the gerund category and what I have excluded. Participles are distinguished from gerunds by their different function in a sentence – participles have function similar to adjectives, whereas gerunds have function similar to nouns. All nouns with the –ing ending, however, can not be qualified as gerunds. I have paid attention to differences between gerunds and ordinary nouns.

Gerunds are more dynamic than other nouns because they give a name to some action, not to

-52- a living being or a thing. Nouns such as fishing , swimming or reading I would therefore place to the gerund category, whilst other –ing nouns, such as “painting” or “carving” in the sentences such as That’s a lovely painting , These are beautiful carvings I would exclude from this category because they denote mere material things as many other nouns (“picture”,

“vase”). It is maybe needless to emphasize that nouns with the –ing endings that were not formed from verbs do not belong to the gerund category either: “sibling”, “darling”,

“sterling”. In Czech, the group of nouns that resembles English gerund the most is that of verbal nouns. A typical ending that would characterize them is the ending –ní, -tí. Examples of this kind could be the following nouns: vstávání, zpívání, plavání, focení . They denote different sorts of action, similarly to gerunds in English. They can serve as parts of predications either, in vast majority altogether with the copula verb “to be”: Filmový festival je vždy střetnutí odlišných kultur . Czech verbal nouns can also be differentiated according to perfect and imperfect aspect, depending on the aspect of the verb the verbal noun was derived from. Thus there is sometimes a wide range of nouns from the same root: “mést”/ “vymést”/

“vymetat”/ “vymetávat” – “metení”/ “vymetení”/ “vymetání”/ “vymetávání”, “zrát”/ “uzrát”/

“uzrávat” – “zrání”/ “uzrání”/ “uzrávání”(Komárek1986: 136). There exist also nouns in

Czech with the endings –ní or –tí which were formed from verbs but should not be considered verbal nouns on the basis of what they denote. This is concerning, for example, the following noun “představení” in Bylo to zajímavé představení . The main reason why it should be excluded from the verbal noun category is the fact that the original name of the action has lost its dynamism and can be replaced by a noun “hra”. Similarly, the noun “stání” in Zítra mám druhé stání can not be considered a verbal noun. Endings, identical to those of verbal nouns could be found in other nouns that even do not have a direct connection to verbs, such as

“poslání” in Je to mé životní poslání . The connection to verbs is the characteristic feature of verbal nouns in English as well as gerunds in Czech.

-53-

11. COPULA –LIKE VERB 11. COPULA-LIKE VERB WITH WITH NOUN, PRONOUN, NOUN,

PREPOSITION PRONOUN, PREPOSITION

COPULA-LIKE VERB + NOUN, COPULA VERB+ NOUN, PRONOUN, PRONOUN, PREPOSITION PREPOSITION

There is a book, it’s for her, they are mine Byli jsme studenty, je tvoje, budou s ní

The category near the bottom of my chart is called Copula-like verb with noun, pronoun or preposition. All of these word classes are of a truly nominal character. Copula- like verbs that take part in this kind of predication are of a wide range in English: “be”,

“make”, “take”, “get”, “go”, “have” and many others. The following examples include all of the three classes of words: There is a book , It was him , I will take a look at it , They were with us . Situation in Czech is very similar except the wide range of copula verbs that exists in

English. The most frequent verb with such function is, again, the verb “to be” – “být”.

Sometimes, also the verb “mít” resembles copula, but attention must be paid to the context. It resembles copula the most in cases where it could be replaced by the verb “být”: Tatínka má horníkem ( Jeho tatínek je horníkem ), Košili má z bavlny ( Jeho košile je z bavlny ), Dědeček má dům na spadnutí (Dědečkův dům je na spadnutí ). Another type of sentences where “mít” could be replaced by “být” is this one represented by two examples: Petr má syna v nemocnici

(Petrův syn je v nemocnici ), Zapalovač máš v pravé kapse ( Tvůj zapalovač je v pravé kapse ).

In other (colloquial) constructions the verb “mít” is semantically empty: To máš těžké ( To je těžké ), Už máme po bouřce ( Už je po bouřce ). The verb “mít”, however, can not be considered copula in those cases where its meaning is “to posses”, such as Mám nové kolo or even in expressing relations – Mám dva bratry , Měl přítelkyni, ale rozešel se s ní . Border cases are represented by those examples where “mít” has an abstract meaning: Student má talent, Měl jsem chřipku . (Grepl 1986: 243-247). Such cases should not be considered true

-54- copulas because of their “abstract possessivity”. In English the verb “have” behaves similarly.

The abstract meaning of the verb “have” could be found in these examples: He had a chance to win , Mary had flu . English also has many other verbs which could be dynamic in one context and semantically void in another context. These are some of those verbs: “go”, “get”,

“come” or “take”. The following examples show such verbs in two sentences – in the first one the verb is denoting action, whereas in the second example it resembles copula: Mary made a

Christmas dinner – She made a scream , John got a beautiful present yesterday – Get a rush! ,

Peter took the book away from the table – He took a smile . It is always necessary to look at the context when analyzing dynamism of predications.

12. NONVERBAL CONSTRUCTION 12. NON VERBAL CONSTRUCTION

If the Czech construction is without If the English construction is without any verbal element any verbal element

Fire! ( for Hoří! ) Gól! ( for Scores!)

The last category is made for those predications which have their counterparts in the second language without any verbal element, not even the copula-like one. Such phenomenon can be best seen in exclamation sentences. In English this is, for example, characteristic for the following phrases: The bell! – Zvoní!, Fire! – Hoří! . One example in Czech could be the exclamation Gól! . Though origin of this word is undoubtedly English ( Goal ), the right translation should be Scores! . This phenomenon, however, concerns all kinds of sentences.

Another example could be the following one: When in doubt, ask for advice – Když si nebudete jisti, požádejte o radu .

VIII. THE CHART OF DYNAMISM: ANALYSIS OF EXAMPLES

-55-

English and Czech Predications: The Chart of Dynamism, Analysis of Examples

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Verb only / Verb only 820 1336 417 680 403 656

Infinitive in a predication/ Infinitive in 164 142 97 65 67 77 a predication Non-predicative infinitive/ Non-predicative 61 3 37 3 24 0 infinitive Past participle in a predication/ “Pasívum opisné” 123 27 60 10 63 17 a predication Non-predicative past participle/ Non-predicative 11 0 4 0 7 0 “pasívum opisné” Present participle in a predication/ Přechodník p.,m. in 93 0 57 0 36 0 a predication, verbal adjective Non-predicative present participle/ Non-predicative 48 0 23 0 25 0 Přechodník p., m., verbal adjective Predicative or non- predicative gerund/ Predicative or non- 10 0 1 0 9 0 predicative verbal noun Copula-like verb with adjective/ Copula-like verb 108 58 40 20 68 38 with adjective Copula-like verb with adverb/ Auxiliary with 2 9 2 9 0 0 adverb Copula-like verb with noun, pron., prep./ 212 142 120 98 92 44 Copula-like verb with noun, pron., prep Nonverbal construction/ Nonverbal 70 5 28 2 42 3 construction

-56-

The chart on the previous page shows the frequency of different categories of predications as they were present in the analyzed texts.

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Verb only / Verb only 820 1336 417 680 403 656

I used the chart for the comparison of Czech and English predications in the two books – War with the Newts and Main Street . I have divided the chart into previous categories and compared the English and Czech version of both of the two books and English and Czech predications in general.

The first category verb only has the ratio of English to Czech predications 820:1336; proportionally it is 38.03%: 61.97%. Czech syntactical predications are much more frequent than the English ones. The number of such predications in Czech absolutely dominates other types of predications, the nearest number being 142 (infinitive, copula-like verb with noun, pronoun and preposition). Predominance of the first category in English is not as obvious as in Czech: there are 820 predications of the first category, the second largest category being copula-like verb with noun, pronoun and preposition – 212. The main reason why this category is more numerous in Czech than in English is a frequent use of tenses (that are) stressing quality, not only action (tenses of progressive and perfect aspects), use of sentence condensers, infinitives, passives and nominal constructions. A typical example of the first book, War with the Newts by Karel Čapek, could be the translation of this sentence: “Sorry,

Captain […], ale tady, na Tana Masa, žádné mušle nerostou” (19). “Sorry, Captain […] but there are no pearl-oysters here on Tana Masa” (11). The simple Czech verb “nerostou” is replaced by a complex nominal construction “there are no”. The second example from War

-57- with the Newts shows the Czech original sentence with a predication belonging to the Verb only category but the English translation has a different kind of a predication: “Mládenci,” kokrhal, “buď tam má náš starý holku, nebo se dočista zbláznil” (26). “Boys,” he said;

“either the old man’s got a girl there or he’s gone clean off his rocker” (19). The fully dynamic Czech predication “se zbláznil” is replaced by an idiomatic predication using nominal elements (“has gone clean off his rocker”). Another example is from the second book and shows an English sentence having an idiomatic predication with nominal elements and another one formed from a nominal element as well: “I’ll get my hands on one of these prairie towns and make it beautiful” (11). The predication “I’ll get my hands” can not exist without the nominal elements “my hands” whereas the verb “get” resembles a copula. The second predication consists of a copula-like verb “make” and an adjective “beautiful” on which the stress lies. The Czech translation, however, consists of truly verbal predications:

“Vrhnu se na některé městečko na prérii a zkrášlím je” (12). In the following example from

Main Street the English passive predication using a past participle (“were disturbed”) is translated as a fully dynamic verb in Czech (“vyrušil”) as well as the English non-predicative present participle (“seeking” – “zatoužil”): Two minutes later – two hectic minutes – they were disturbed by an embarrassed couple also seeking the idyllic seclusion of the overshoe- closet (15). Dvě minuty poté – a byly to dvě hektické minuty – je vyrušil jiný rozpačitý párek, který rovněž zatoužil po idylickém ústraní mezi přezůvkami v šatně (16). It proves that it is simply natural for Czech to use various dynamic verbs in a long sentence whereas English can use just one copula-like verb, such as “to be”. It could be found in the chart that there are almost no differences in numbers between the two books as far as the first category is concerned. If we take the book War with the Newts with its translation into English, the ratio is 417:680 (English/Czech) whereas Main Street has the ratio 403:656 (English/Czech).

Proportionally, it is 38.01%: 61.99% ( War with the Newts ) and 38.05%: 61.95% ( Main

-58-

Street) . This could mean that both of the translations were of a high quality and correspond to a natural use of language.

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Infinitive in a predication/ Infinitive in 164 142 92 74 72 68 a predication

There is just a small difference between English and Czech in the second category. I have found 164 units in the English versions and 142 in the Czech versions, that means

53.6% to 46.4% (English/ Czech). In most cases, infinitive in one language corresponds to infinitive in the second one. The main exception is the future tense which can often be expressed by one fully dynamic verb in Czech which is not possible in English. In addition,

English sometimes uses infinitive, mostly with a modal auxiliary, to express the meaning that the Czech non-infinitive one-verb predication has. That is why number of infinitives in

English is slightly higher than in Czech. In general, Infinitive in a predication is not a very numerous category because Czech predominantly uses predications of the first category ( verb only ) and English, in addition to the verb only category, uses predications of many other categories. The first example from War with the Newts shows infinitives in both of the languages and one infinitive in English replaced by a fully dynamic verb in Czech. The second example from Main Street shows an infinitive in English as a part of the future tense and its translation into Czech by a non-infinitive predication: “ To by mohla být prima reportáž. Golombku, pojedeme?” (30). “Could make a first-rate story. Golombek, shall we go?” (22). “ It’s mighty pretty, but I’ll admit we aren’t any too darn artistic” (22). „Je tam moc hezky, ale na umění tedy moc nejsme, to připustím” (23). The first sentence shows the most frequent phenomenon of this category - an infinitive with a modal auxiliary in Czech is correspondent to an infinitive with a modal auxiliary in English (“by mohla být” – “could

-59- be”). The second sentence, on the other hand, is an example of an English predication with modal auxiliary expressing the future tense and with infinitive and its Czech translation using syntactical expression of the future tense (“pojedeme” – “shall we go”). Example from the second book shows infinitive as a part of an English future tense and, again, Czech one-verb expression of the future (“I’ll admit” – “připustím”). In the second example from War with the Newts the Czech simple verb form “pošlu” has its counterpart in the English infinitive form of the conditional (“would send”) due to the rules of sequence of tenses in English: Ten hoch už nikdy nebude k ničemu, řekl si, pošlu ho z Padangu domů na Cejlon (25). That boy wouldn’t be any use for anything, he thought to himself, he’d send him home to Ceylon from

Padang (18). The second example from Main Street is similar to the previous one from War with the Newts . The Czech predication from the category Verb only (“si zamilujete”) has its original in the conditional (“would love”): “Gopher Prairii si zamilujete” (24). “You’d love

Gopher Prairie” (22).

There is a slight difference between results in the two books. Whereas English infinitives are more frequent than the Czech ones in War with the Newts (92:74; 55.42%:

44.58%, English/Czech), the difference in Main Street is inconsiderable (72:68; 51.42%:

48.58%, English/Czech). The main reason for that is the fact that the future tense is used less frequently in the first two chapters of Main Street than in War with the Newts . That is why also the category of infinitives is on the whole less numerous in Lewis’ book than in War with the Newts (166:140).

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Non-predicative infinitive/ Non-predicative 61 3 37 3 24 0 infinitive

-60-

The third category of the non-predicative infinitive is the one where the difference between English and Czech is huge. I have found 61 examples of this category in English and only 3 examples in Czech. Proportionally it is 95.3% to 4.7% (English/ Czech). This certainly proves that English contrary to Czech has a strong tendency towards sentence condensation.

Such condensation destroys predications and replaces subordinate clauses with semi-clausal structures (Vachek 1975: 106). Typical examples of such phenomenon are found in both of the books: Kapitán J. van Toch mu s neočekávanou hbitostí zpolíčkoval obě tváře dlaní i hřbetem ruky, aby ho přivedl k sobě (25). With unexpected agility Captain van Toch slapped both his cheeks with the palm and the back of his hand to bring him round (17). “Pleased to meet you”, stated Dr. Kennicott (18). „Těší mě, že vás poznávám,“ prohlásil doctor Kennicott

(19). The Czech predication of the first example (“přivedl k sobě”) is replaced by a non- predicative infinitive in the English translation (“to bring him round”). The second example proves that such condensation replaces not just the Czech adverbial clause but also the Czech objective clause. The predication of the Czech subordinate clause of the objective type

(“poznávám”) is replaced by a mere infinitive in English (“to meet”). In the following two examples the Czech dependent sentences are again replaced by sentence condensers in the form of infinitives in English: “Batakové nemají rádi, když někdo ty…čerty vyruší” (20).

“The Bataks don’t like people to…to disturb the devils” (12). “To think that in just a few days we’ll be parting, and we’ll never see some of the bunch again!” (14). “Když si člověk pomyslí, že se za pár dní rozprchneme a některé holky a kluky už do smrti neuvidíme!” (15).

There is not a considerable difference between the comparison of predications in War with the

Newts and Main Street . In War with the Newts subordinate clauses are slightly more frequent and condensation is found also in Czech, whereas in Main Street not a single sentence in

Czech uses non-predicative infinitive. The ratio is 37: 3; 92.5%: 7.5% ( War with the Newts ) and 24:0; 100%: 0% ( Main Street ).

-61-

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Past participle in a predication/ “Pasívum opisné” 123 27 60 10 63 17 a predication

The next category Past participle in a predication/ “Pasívum opisné” in a predication which includes all the predications which have something in common with the stressing of the resulting state in a particular moment of time, is more frequently used in English because

Czech does not have such a wide range of tenses stressing detailed shades of reality. Whereas

Czech uses only passives in this category, English uses tenses of a perfect aspect, passives and combinations of both. In addition, English passives also frequently replace fully dynamic verbs or more dynamic reflexive constructions in Czech, such as in this sentence from War with the Newts : „Ne, on je v Praze, ale narodil se, myslím, tady v Jevíčku“ (34). “No, he lives in Prague, but I rather think he was born here, in Jevíčko” (26), (“narodil se” – “was born”).

The difference in numbers in this category is, therefore, huge – 123: 27 (English/ Czech).

Proportionally it is 82%: 18% (English/Czech). Another example, an extract from War with the Newts , offers two passive constructions in English and just one in Czech: …ale když dostal večer hlášení, že všechno zboží je uskladněno, zafuněl jenom … (26). …but when in the evening he was informed that all the cargo had been stowed he merely snorted …(19). Passive in English often corresponds to passive in Czech (“je uskladněno” – “had been stowed”) but sometimes, if it is not necessary, it is more natural for Czech to use more dynamic construction (“dostal hlášení” – “was informed”). In the first example from Main Street the

English passive predication with the past participle “must be cloaked” is correspondent to the passive predication in Czech, to “pasívum opisné” – “musí být obklopeno”: She seemed then but half as large as they had supposed; a fragile child who must be cloaked with understanding kindness (8). Zdála se sotva poloviční, než by byly předpokládaly, křehké dítě,

-62- které musí být obklopeno pochopením a laskavostí (8). Another example, from the book The

Main Street , is an example of an English predication of a perfect aspect that is translated by a simple past in Czech: “ Have you looked that up in the library? Well then, suppose you do! ”

(11). „Hledal jste to v knihovně? A což kdybyste tak učinil?“ (12). The use of the Czech past tense is not truly correspondent to the English present perfect because it does not just express the action of “looking up” but also the resulting state in the present moment (to have it looked up, to have the knowledge). Czech in fact does not have the means to express correctly the perfect aspect found in English. The differences between predications of this category in War with the Newts and Main Street are slight (60: 10; 85.71%: 14.29%, English/ Czech – in War with the Newts ), (63: 17; 78.75%: 21.25%, English/ Czech – in Main Street ).

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Non-predicative past participle/ Non-predicative 11 0 4 0 7 0 “pasívum opisné”

The category of Non-predicative past participle/ non-predicative “pasívum opisné” is the first one of those without any unit in the Czech books. It is not surprising as the Czech language almost does not use sentence condensers. They sound rather archaic in nowadays

Czech. The overall ratio is 11: 0; 100%: 0% (English/ Czech). They are not used much frequently even in English: there are just eleven examples of non-predicative past participle in the first two chapters of both of the books altogether. The number is higher (7) in Main Street than in War with the Newts (4) but the number is too low to allow any conclusion. Still it is possible to say that the use of non-predicative participles is not a unique phenomenon in

English contrary to Czech. These are two examples of them in English, the first one from War with the Newts and the second one from Main Street , altogether with their Czech counterparts:

“Easily said,” said a sixth (22). “To se řekne,” povídá šestý (30). …and a rebellious girl is the spirit of that bewildered empire called the American Middlewest (8). …rebelantské děvče

-63- teď vyjadřuje ducha zmateného impéria, jež se zove americký Středozápad (7). The English past participles (“said” and “called”) are replaced in Czech by predicative verb forms (“se

řekne” and “se zove”). Though the translation “se zove” sounds archaic and is hardly heard in

Czech the modern translation “se nazývá” is merely stylistically different and has the same level of dynamism. Both of the Czech verbs (“se řekne” and “se zove”) are reflexive forms which proves that such forms often replace the English past participles. Another example is from War with Newts . Here the Czech fully dynamic predication in the past tense is replaced by an English past participle lacking auxiliary: “Sure. Born right here” (23). “Ja. Narodil”

(31). In the extract from The Main Street the non-predicative past participle in English has its counterpart in the Czech dependent clause formed from an attribute: …she was homesick for it, she felt robbed of her work (13). …stýskalo se jí a měla pocit, že jí ukradli její práci (14).

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Present participle in a predication/ Přechodník p.,m. in 93 0 57 0 36 0 a predication, verbal adjective

The category Present participle in a predication/ “přechodník přítomný” or “minulý” in a predication (a verbal adjective) is yet another category which has no units in Czech as far as the analyzed chapters are concerned. In English, on the other hand, the use of the progressive aspect is common but only for the most dynamic verbs. There are 93 units of predications of the progressive aspect in the analyzed English chapters and no verbal adjectives in Czech chapters - that is 100%: 0% (English/ Czech). War with the Newts comprises more examples of this category (57) than Main Street (36). It could be caused by a higher frequency of a direct speech in the first book and a more narrative style of Main Street .

The example from the translation of War with the Newts shows two predications of the

-64- progressive aspect with predications of the original Czech sentence: But by then Jensen and

Gudmonson were pulling on their oars and fairly whipping their dinghy round the nearest headland (20). …ale to už se Jensen a Gudmondson opřeli do vesel a hnali svůj člun za nejbližší roh, až to svištělo (27). The analytical forms with present participles in English

(“were pulling” and “whipping”) have their counterparts in one-word Czech predications

(“opřeli se” and “hnali”). The second English predication “whipping” apparently misses the auxiliary “were” so that it slightly resembles a sentence condenser. On the basis of the conjunction “and” it belongs, however, to the predication of the past progressive tense. It shows, anyway, how slight is the difference between the supposedly highly dynamic progressive aspect and the participial nominal sentence condenser (“they were pulling on their oars and fairly whipping their dinghy round” – “they were pulling on their oars, fairly whipping their dinghy round”). The past progressive tense of the second example from War with the Newts is recognized easily. The Czech original predication (“třásl se”) belongs to the category Verb only : …seděl s koleny pod bradou a třásl se na celém těle (24). He sat with his knees drawn up to his chin and was shaking all over (17). The first example from Main Street shows another clearly recognizable predication of the past progressive tense in English and its

Czech translation by a simple verb form: …and she discovered that she was crying (23).

Shledala, že pláče (25). This is another example from Main Street : He herded her to a sofa with Dr.Kennicott, who was rather vague about the eyes, rather drooping of bulky shoulders, as though he was wondering what he was expected to do next (18). The Czech translation is

Zavedl ji na pohovku k doktoru Kennicottovi, který se koukal dost netečně a seděl, statná ramena trochu nahrbena, jako by uvažoval, co by měl podle všeobecného očekávání dělat dál

(19). Here the past perfect tense (“as though he was wondering”) is replaced by the Czech predication (“jako by uvažoval”). It is interesting to look at the first half of the sentence beginning with “who”: “who was rather vague about the eyes, rather drooping of bulky

-65- shoulders”. Here the participial sentence condenser “drooping” resembles to a great extent the predication of the past progressive tense. As this kind of predication does not have to include the auxiliary (as it was in the previous example) and even does not have to be separated by a conjunction (as in He was singing, dancing and playing guitar ) it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between a predication of progressive aspect and a participial condenser. In other words, they are similar to each other.

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Non-predicative present participle/ Non-predicative 48 0 23 0 25 0 přechodník p., m., verbal adjective

The non-predicative present participles or sentence condensers I have included right after the predications of the progressive aspects on the ground of their previously mentioned similarity. The non-predicative verbal adjectives are hardly used in Czech and that is why this category is again empty. There are 48 participial condensers in the analyzed English chapters

(100%: 0%, English/ Czech). This fact shows that English frequently uses participial sentence condensers. There is almost no difference in frequency of non-predicative participles in the first two chapters of War with the Newts and Main Street (23 and 25). In reality, the amount of non-predicative present participles could be even higher in War with the Newts if Čapek lived in modern era because he uses a number of non-predicative verbal adjectives in Czech

(“přechodníky”) which are no longer used and are replaced by dependent clauses. But even at that time Czech frequently used dependent clauses in place of English participial sentence condensers. The first example, the translation from War with the Newts , is characterized by multiple sentence condensation: And meanwhile there are five or six lonely people sitting in the editorial office because all their colleagues are also on holiday, angrily throwing down their papers and complaining that there isn’t a thing, not a damned thing, in the paper (21).

-66-

The Czech original sentence is without any sentence condenser: A zatím v redakci sedí pět nebo šest opuštěných lidí, neboť ostatní kolegové jsou také na dovolené, kde tlukou rozhořčeně novinami a stěžují si, že teď v těchto novinách nic, ale docela Nic není (29). The three non-predicative present participles (“sitting”, “throwing” and “complaining”) are replaced by Czech fully dynamic predications (“sedí”, “tlukou” and “stěžují si”). Whereas the whole English sentence consists of just three clauses, the Czech sentence is constructed from five clauses. Another sentence from the same book offers two Czech non-predicative verbal adjectives (“plovoucích”, “stojících”) replaced by two non-predicative present participles in

English (“swimming”, “standing”) and two Czech predications of the category Verb only (“se dívali”, “dělá”) the first one of which has its counterpart in another non-predicative English present participle (“watching”): “ Sta a sta, pane, plovoucích i stojících na kamenech, a všichni se dívali, co tam Singhalec dělá” (25). “Hundreds and hundreds, sir, swimming or standing on rocks, and all of them watching what the Singhalese was doing there” (17). The following example is the original sentence from Main Street : …and she could not picture herself standing before grinning children and pretending to be wise and decisive (13). Its

Czech translation is: …a nedovedla si představit, že by stanula před rozesmátými dětmi a předstírala, že je moudrá a energická (14). The English participial sentence condensers

(“standing” and “pretending”) are naturally translated into Czech by predications in conditional (“by stanula” and “předstírala”). A similar example from the same book also has an English participial sentence condenser (“building”) replaced by a Czech fully dynamic predication (“přibývají”) as a part of a dependent clause: “And we’ve got seven miles of cement walks already, and building more every day!” (19). “A máme už sedm mil betonových chodníků a den co den přibývají další” (20). The difference in dynamism between sentences of this kind in English and Czech is huge.

-67-

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Copula-like verb with adjective/ Copula-like verb 108 60 40 22 68 38 with adjective

The category called Copula-like verb with adjective is more numerous than the previous four categories. There are more predications of this category in English than in

Czech. The ratio is 108: 60; that is 64.29%: 35.71% (English/ Czech). This difference can not be explained by any other way than by the specific feature of English to prefer nominal expressions. The book War with the Newts has more examples of this category than Main

Street but the ratio between English and Czech chapters is almost identical: 40:22; 64.52%:

35.48% for War with the Newts (English/ Czech) and 68: 38; 64.15%: 35.85% for Main

Street . One example from the book War with the Newts where an English predication with an adjective has its counterpart in a fully dynamic Czech predication is this one: “Somebody called the bay Devil Bay and the Bataks have been afraid of it ever since” (12-13). “Někdo dal tomu zálivu jméno Čertův záliv, a od té doby se ho Batakové bojí” (21). The copula-like verb “have been” with the adjective “afraid” is replaced in Czech by the dynamic predication

“se bojí”. The second example from War with the Newts offers a Czech infinitive predication

(“může stát”) that has its counterpart in an English predication of the category Copula-like verb with an adjective (“are worth”): “Co to může stát?” vydechl pan Valenta (33). “How much are they worth?” Mr. Valenta gasped (25). Similar examples could be found in The

Main Street , such as this one: “It’s pleasant but sometimes I feel shut off from things…” (18) which is translated into Czech in this way: “Zamlouvá se mi, ale někdy mám pocit, že jsem odříznutá od světa…” (21). A predication with an adjective (“is pleasant”) is replaced by a

“verb only predication” (“zamlouvá se”). Another example is the sentence from the same book where the English copula-like verb and an adjective (“get sick”) is translated into Czech

-68- by a fully dynamic reflexive verb (“neprotiví se vám”): “Don’t you get sick of the city?”

(18). “Neprotiví se vám to někdy, žít ve velkém městě?” (20). These examples prove that if there is a choice in how to describe the same reality, English frequently, contrary to Czech, chooses a predication with a nominal element, such as an adjective.

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Copula-like verb with adverb/ Copula-like verb 2 7 2 7 0 0 with adverb

A category similar to the previous one is the category Copula-like verb with an adverb . Here the number of such predications is higher in the Czech chapters than in the

English ones: 2: 7; 22.22%: 77.78% (English/ Czech). This fact, however, does not indicate that Czech uses nominal expressions with adverbs in cases where English uses more dynamic predications. The truth is that nominal predications with adverbs are very rare in English but those Czech ones are most frequently replaced by other nominal predications with the help of adjectives, nouns or other nominal elements. It is so in the following example from the book

War with the Newts : “Už je dobře?” (25). The translation into English “All right now?” (17) is less dynamic than the Czech sentence with a copula-like verb (“je”) and an adverb

(“dobře”) because it even lacks any verb. The first two chapters of the second book Main

Street do not have predications formed from adverbs; this is concerning the English as well as the Czech chapters.

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Copula-like verb with gerund/ Copula-like verb 10 0 1 0 9 0 with verbal noun

-69-

The following category of Predicative or non-predicative gerund/ verbal noun is a minor category with not many units. The first two chapters of the analyzed books in Czech do not have a single unit also in this category. There are 10 examples of predications with gerund in the English chapters (100%: 0%, English/ Czech). It could be derived from the analysis that

English frequently uses gerunds in sentences where Czech uses a much more dynamic predication. This fact is supported, for example, by this sentence from the second book, Main

Street: “At various times during Senior year Carol finally decided upon studying law, writing motion-pictures scenarios, professional nursing, and marrying an unidentified hero” (9-10).

The Czech translation is: “Během posledního ročníku se Carol každou chvíli s konečnou platností rozhodla, že bude studovat práva, psát filmové scénáře, že se stane ošetřovatelkou a

že se provdá za hrdinu blíže neurčeného” (10). The original English sentence has only one predication (“decided”) and all of the following activities are expressed by nominal gerunds

(“studying”, “writing”, “nursing” and “marrying”) functioning as sentence condensers. The

Czech translation, on the other hand, has five predications (“bude studovat”, “bude psát”, “se stane”, “se provdá”) which form one independent clause and four dependent objective clauses. The first two chapters of War with the Newts have just one example of a gerund which is replaced by a Czech predication. The difference in quantity between the two books is not as huge as it might seem because Main Street does not have many sentences with gerunds either. The difference could be explained by the fact that one sentence often includes multiple gerunds as it was so in the previous example where there were four gerunds. The sentence with a gerund in a predication from the book War with the Newts is the following one: “Will you carry on fishing?” (16). The verb “carry on” resembles copula in that it has a vague meaning (it is similar to verbs such as “keep” or “go on”) and it needs a gerund to follow. The most important element in the sentence is the gerund “fishing”. The original Czech sentence is

“Budete lovit dál?” (24). Its predication is more dynamic than the English one, it consists

-70- from an auxiliary and infinitive. It is obvious from these examples as well as from the chart that Czech rarely uses verbal nouns and prefers more dynamic predications instead.

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Copula-like verb with noun, pron., prep./ 212 142 120 98 92 44 Copula-like verb with noun, pron., prep

This category, Copula-like verb with noun, pronoun or preposition , is less dynamic than the previous one because nouns, pronouns and preposition have exclusively nominal character. Predications of this kind appear more frequently in the English than in the Czech texts: 212: 142; 59.89%: 40.11%, (English/ Czech). The explanation could be the same as before – English has a tendency toward nominalization. The fact that there is a considerable difference in the amount of units belonging to this category between War with the Newts (120:

98; English/ Czech) and Main Street (92: 44; English/ Czech) results from the content of the chapters. The ratio between English and Czech predications is 55.05%: 44.95% in War with the Newts (English/ Czech) and 67.65%: 32.35% in Main Street . The difference between

English and Czech is not as obvious in War with the Newts because Čapek’s text is more archaic than the Czech translation of Main Street . But the tendency of English towards nominal predications with nouns, pronouns or prepositions is expressed clearly in both of the books anyway. This example is from War with the Newts : The half-breed translated faithfully, whereupon another lively consultation took place (22). The original Czech sentence sounds in this way: Míšenec to poctivě přeložil, načež opět následovala delší živá porada (14). The

Czech predication (“následovala”) is without any nominal element contrary to the English

-71- translation in which the predication “took place” has a nominal element in the noun “place”.

This noun is necessary for the predication because it would have no sense without it. Similar example from the same book but using a preposition as a nominal element is this one:

“What’s up?” yelled the captain (15). The copula-like verb (“is”) with the preposition (“up”) is replaced by a fully dynamic Czech predication “se stalo”: “Co se stalo?” křičel kapitán

(23). From the book Main Street I have chosen the following example: They were biology and mystery; their speech was slang phrases and flares of poetry; their silences were contentment, or shaky crises when his arm took her shoulder (20). This long sentence is translated into

Czech in this way: Byl to vztah, který sestával z biologie a mystéria, jeho řeč tvořila slangová

úsloví i básnické vize, jeho odmlky naplňovalo uspokojení nebo kritické rozechvění, když ji objal paží kolem ramenou (22). The English original undoubtedly emphasizes the nominal element of those predications, the noun, and that is the reason why the only verb in the predications is the semantically void “were” or “was”: “were biology and mystery”, “was slang phrases and flares of poetry”, “were contentment, or shaky crises”. The translator felt that such emphasize of the nominal element would sound unnatural in Czech and put the stress on the verbs which he made more dynamic so that they would not resemble copulas anymore: “sestával (z biologie a mystéria)”, “tvořila (slangová úsloví i básnické vize)”,

“naplňovalo (uspokojení nebo kritické rozechvění)”. A similar example from the same book shows a predication in English in which the stress lies on the noun as well: It was the advice of the professor of English which led her to study professional library-work in a Chicago school (13). Czech is not used to such expressions and that is why the predication (“was the advice…”) is translated with a truly verbal predication “poradil”: Profesor angličtiny jí poradil, aby šla do Chicaga studovat knihovnictví (14).

-72-

English Czech War Válka Main Hlavní with the s mloky Street Třída Newts Nonverbal construction/ Nonverbal 70 5 28 2 42 3 construction

The English tendency towards preferring nominal elements over verbs as it was in the previous category is obvious from this category as well. I have found many examples in both of the books where a verb in Czech was often left out completely in English whereas the vice- versa situation was rare. There were 70 examples of such phenomenon in English and only 5 in Czech, proportionally it is 93.33%: 6.67% (English/ Czech). The difference between Czech and English is proportionally the same in War with the Newts (28: 2; 93.33%: 6.67%, English/

Czech) as in Main Street (42: 2; 93.33%: 6.67%, English/ Czech) because the more archaic

Čapek’s language do not have influence on missing out verbs. These are two examples from

War with the Newts where Czech verbs do not have counterparts in English because the translator found it unnatural: “To jsou černošské pověry”… (20). “Nigger superstitions, man”… (12). …seděl na verandě z vlnitého plechu, držel v tlustých prstech sklenku z tlustého skla a pil… (26). …he sat on the corrugated iron verandah with a thick glass between his thick fingers, and drank… (18). The English translations are missing the English counterparts of the Czech verbs “jsou” and “držel“. Similar examples are found in Main Street : The smallness of the school, the fewness of rivals, permitted her to experiment with her perilous versatility (8). Jelikož škola byla malá a konkurence nepočetná, mohla si dovolit experimentovat, jak to vyhovovalo její nebezpečně roztěkané povaze (8). In this sentence even two Czech predications replace nonverbal structures in the English original: “the smallness”,

“the fewness” – “byla malá”, “byla nepočetná” and “with versatility” – “vyhovovalo povaze”.

In the following sentence the adjective “book-ignoring” is translated as a predication of a dependent clause “nečtou”: From those early brown and silver days and from her

-73- independence of relatives Carol retained a willingness to be different from brisk efficient book-ignoring people… (13) Tyto rané stříbrohnědé dny a její nezávislost na příbuzných vypěstovaly v Carol touhu být jiná než rázní, výkonní lidé, kteří nic nečtou… (14).

Finally, I have chosen to add one more example from Main Street which illustrates the enormous difference between English and Czech as far as the dynamism of predications is concerned: She saw herself persuading children to read charming fairy tales, helping young men to find books on mechanics, being ever so courteous to old men who were hunting for newspapers (13). Už se viděla, jak přemlouvá děti, aby četly rozkošné pohádky, jak pomáhá mladým mužům hledat knihy o mechanice, jak je ohromně roztomilá ke starcům, kteří shánějí

časopisy (14). Four of the Czech dependent clauses are replaced by various sentence condensers (infinitive, present participle).

IX. CONCLUSION

I have found major differences in dynamism of predications between English and

Czech. Czech expresses dynamic situations almost always by means of a verbal predication.

The vast majority, 77.58% of the examined units, are even highly dynamic predications without emphasizing a state or stressing a nominal element. English, on the other hand, has only 47.62% of such predications, less than one half. There is a number of nominal tendencies in English resulting in that proportion.

First of all, English frequently uses special constructions in which the major role is played by a nominal element, such as the construction beginning with “there is”. What is very common in English is a predication in the passive voice or predication with a perfect aspect both of which emphasize the resulting state and are less dynamic than truly active predications. English had 96 cases of such predications which were expressed in a more

-74- dynamic way in Czech. English passive constructions are more frequent than the Czech ones,

English can even make passive from an indirect or prepositional object of the active verb

(Mathesius 1975: 107). Constructions of the type “to have something done” are not found in

Czech and are replaced by constructions with infinitive, “dát, nechat si něco udělat”. Another typical feature of English is a frequent use of sentence condensers. These nominal elements express what would be expressed in Czech by a dependent clause. The most frequent condensers are the present participle, infinitive and gerund (Vachek 1980: 106-107). In addition, the dynamism of tenses of progressive aspect is lessened by resembling a present participle and frequent turning into non-predicative present participle. I have found in the studied texts 80 examples of sentence condensation in English which was replaced by dependent clauses in Czech. Finally, English can also be characterized by the use of predications where the semantic centre of gravity lies on the nominal element and the verb has merely grammatical function and is similar to a copula. In the majority of cases, Czech expresses the same situation in a purely verbal way. On the whole, there were 113 of such predications in English (copula-like verb with adjective, adverb, gerund, noun, pronoun or preposition) which were not expressed in the same nominal way in Czech. Sometimes English simply left out the verb that had to be in Czech. There were 70 cases of that, Czech did the same in just 5 cases.

These findings prove a strong tendency of English, contrary to Czech, towards less dynamic nominal expression and leaving out verbal elements if possible.

-75-

LITERATURE

Dušková, Libuše. Mluvnice současné angličtiny na pozadí češtiny . Prague: Academia, 1994

Grepl, Miroslav and Karlík, Petr. Skladba spisovné češtiny . Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, 1986

Hladký, Josef. “Remarks on Complex Condensation Phenomena in Some English and Czech Contexts”. Brno Studies in English, Volume 3. Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, 1961.

Hladký, Josef, Růžička, Milan. A Functional Onomatology of English . Brno: Masaryk University, 1998.

Komárek, Miroslav, Kořenský, Jan, Petr, Jan. Mluvnice češtiny 2, Tvarosloví . Prague: Academia, 1996.

Mathesus, Vilém. A Functional Analysis of Present Day English on a General Linguistic Basis . Prague: Academia, 1975.

Pickett, Joseph. American Heritage Book of English Usage . Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1996.

Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney. A University Grammar of English . Harlow: Longman Group Limited, 1973.

Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidnney, Svartvik, Jan. A Grammar of Contemporary English . London: Longman Group Limited, 1972.

Vachek, Josef. Linguistic Characterology of Modern English . Brno: Purkyně University, 1980.

Vachek, Josef. “Some Less Familiar Aspects of the Analytical Trend of English”, Brno Studies in English, Volume Three. Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, 1961.

Vachek, Josef, Firbas, Jan. Historický vývoj angličtiny . Prague: Státní pedagogické Nakladatelství, 1977.

-76-

Šmilauer, Vladimír. Novočeská skladba . Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, 1966.

Sources for analysis :

Čapek, Karel. Válka s Mloky . Prague: Státní nakladatelství krásné literatury a umění, 1965.

Čapek, Karel. War with the Nets . Translated by Ewald Osers. North Haven: Catbird Press, 1985.

Sinclair, Lewis. Hlavní třída . Translated by Eva Kondrysová. Prague: Svoboda, 1975.

Sinclair, Lewis. Main Street . New York: The New Americ an Library of World Literature, Inc., 1961.

-77-