Copular inversion occurs when a nominal predictive is positioned with the subject in a sentence, the Copula be being the finite verb. The result of this inversion is called the inverse copular construction, for example.B. The following sentences illustrate the subject-verb inversion. You compare the canonical order to the non-standard inversion order and show, that subject-verb inversion is unlikely if the subject is a specific weak (un underlined) pronoun: perhaps a clearer, more convenient way to describe this subject-verb peculiarity of inverted sentences: If the subject and the predicate of a sentence differ in number, the binding verb is true with the number of subject sentences. Left. The normative phrase “What I need is two returns to Puerto Princesa”, that is, conversely, “Two round trips to Puerto Princesa is what I need.” Because of the absence of a finished component of the Vice President, the basic hierarchy of components is not changed by inversion. This analysis does not, however, cover the apparent dependence between the main subject and the inverted subject. Subject-verb inversion in English is a kind of inversion in which the subject and verb (or string of verbs, verb catena) change their canonical order of appearance so that the subject follows the verb (the verbs), for example.B. a lamp stood next to the bed → next to the bed was a lamp. The subject-verb inversion is different from the subject-auxiliary inversion because the verb involved is not an auxiliary verb.
Direct inversion is closely related to lokative inversion in that preconspression designates a place, with the only difference that the verb is now a verb of movement. Typical verbs that allow a direct version in English are coming, walking, running, etc. If you read these two sentences at least a few times, the peculiarity of the subject-verb concordance should be taken into account. Invisible mechanisms must accomplish an even more important task for the marijuana example above. This sentence (sentence c in the previous section) would require at least five cases of movement/copy to maintain the presence of an underlying component of the finished Vice President. An alternative analysis of the subject-verb inversion rejects the existence of the finite VP component. Due to the absence of this element, the structure is flatter, which greatly simplifies things. Inverted sentences often do not lead to discontinuity, which means that the fundamental hierarchy of components (the vertical order) does not change beyond the canonical and inverted variants. The following structures illustrate this alternate account. The first two trees illustrate the analysis in a grammar of the structure of unorthodox sentences that rejects the presence of the finished component of the vice president, and the second two illustrate the analysis in a grammar of dependency. The grammar of dependency opposes the presence of a finite component of the Vice President.  The convention is used here, where the words themselves appear as inscriptions on the nodes in the trees. The tree on the left shows the canonical analysis of the sentence, with the sentence divided into two immediate elements, the subject Bill and the vice president ended up squatting in the bush.
To maintain the integrity of the finished vice president element squatting in the bush, one can expect, in the second sentence, a new assignment of the constituents, both squatting and in the bush moving out of the vice president and up the structure. The proposed relationship with the second tree is the kind of analysis that will likely be found in the theory of government and attachment or in the minimalist program. It is a sentence structure count based on invisible motion/copy mechanisms below the surface. These facts clearly distinguish this type of inversion from the simple subject-auxiliary inversion that applies regardless of the weight of the subject: thus, these examples do not specify whether the subject-auxiliary inversion is a unique grammatical phenomenon with the other cases discussed above. . . .