Valency/Transitivity

(1)There are several interpretations of valency two of which are outlined below:

(i)The maximal number of obligatory elements a verb requires to complete its meaning(s) can be referred to as the valency of the verb. Valency can now be considered as an umbrella term, which covers the scrutiny of all the possibilities of linking at various levels, as there is no single valency theory at the moment. Some linguists attribute valency to verbs only whereas others regard valency to be the linking ability of any linguistic element and speak of the valency of all word classes, especially of adjectives and nouns. Verb valency can be defined as the general and specific, variable linking ability of the verb, through which it can get into, often mutual, dependency relations with other linguistic elements. Valency can be described in both quantitative and qualitative terms at the morphosyntactic, logico-semantic as well as pragmatic or communicative level. Using valency features as classifying criteria, verbs can enter into valency classes and form valency patterns. (Budai 1997:xvii—xviii)

(ii)Valency is the grammatical characteristic which gives the number of arguments[1] for which a particular verb subcategorises (Trask 1999b:[296]).

See 2.1-2.4 in Table 1.

(2)Transitivity is a category in the grammatical analysis of clause/sentence constructions, with particular reference to the verb’s relationship to dependent elements of structure (Crystal 1990:316). See 2A-2E in Table 1. This category is a traditional dichotomy of verbs so they can be categorised as intransitive and/or transitive (Budai 1997:xvii).

From a practical point of view intransitivity/transitivity is traditionally signalled in dictionaries. On the other hand more and more dictionaries attempt to display a systematic indication of the linking elements of a verb.

Table 2 Valency and transitive verbs

Valency
/
Examples
/
Transitivity
2.1 / Avalent/ambient verbs: there are no arguments connected to the verb. / rain,
snow / Intransitive verbs have a subject and no object. / 2A
2.2 / Monovalent/
univalent verbs have only one argument. / die, smile / eat, under-stand, kill, paint
/ Labile[2] verbs/absolute transitive verbs: an intrinsically transitive verb occurs with no overt direct object, the subject of the verb interpreted as an agent and the construction being interpreted as active (Trask 1999b:3) / 2B
2.3 / Divalent verbs have two arguments. / describe, assassinate, destroy / eat, under-stand, kill, paint /
Monotransitive verbs have a direct object which is
the second obligatory
argument of a verb,
most typically expressing
a patient
which undergoes
the action of
the verb. / 2C
2.4 / Trivalent verbs have three arguments. / think sy sg,
paint sg sg (SVOCo), put sg swhere (SVOA) /
Complex transitive verbs require clause types SVOCo[3] and SVOA[4] (Quirk et al. 1991:54, McArthur 1992:1051), SVOdPo[5] and SVOdA[6] (Biber 1999:381).
/ 2D
give, show / Ditransitive verbs have two objects, namely a direct object and an indirect object denoting the entity which is the recipient or beneficiary of the action of the verb. / 2E
Notes
/ (Trask 1999b:[296]) / (Trask 1999a:322-3)

Sources

Biber et al. 1999

Biber, Douglas et al. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow : Longman : [Pearson Education Limited], 1999. xxviii, 1204 p. : ill. ; 24.8 cm ISBN 0-582-23725-4

Budai 1997

Budai, László. Morphosyntactic valency classes of English verbs. Veszprém : Veszprémi Egyetemi Kiadó, 1997. xlviii, 483 p. ; 24.2 cm ISBN 963-7332-67-7

Crystal 1990

Crystal, David. A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. 2nd edition, reprinted. Oxford (UK) ;Cambridge (Massachusetts) : Basil Blackwell, 1990. xi, 337, [3] p. : ill. ; 22.9 cm (The language library) ISBN 0-631-14081-6

Quirk et al. 1991

Quirk, Randolph et al. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. 9th impression. London ; New York : Longman, 1991, ©1985. x, 1779 p. : ill. ; 23.5 cm ISBN 0-582-51734-6

Trask 1999a

Trask, R. L. Key concepts in language and linguistics. Reprinted. London ; New York : Routledge, 1999. xviii, 178 p. ; 19.8 cm (Key concepts) ISBN 0-415-15742-0

Trask 1999b

Trask, R. L. A dictionary of grammatical terms and linguistics. Reprinted. London ; New York : Routledge, 1999. xv, 335 p. : ill. ; 21.7 cm ISBN 0-435-08628-0

[1] An argument is a noun phrase bearing a specific grammatical or semantic relation to a verb and whose overt or implied presence is required for well-formedness in structures containing that verb. Arguments may be identified either in terms of grammatical relations (subject, direct object etc.) or in terms of semantic roles (agent, patient etc.). (Trask 1999b:20)

[2] /ˈleɪbaɪl/

[3] Subject+Verb+[direct] Object+Object Complement

[4] Subject+Verb+[direct] Object+Adverbial

[5] Subject+Verb+Direct Object+Object Predicative (noun phrase or adjective)

[6] Subject+Verb+Direct Object+Adverbial