ENGL 672

Finite and Nonfinite1

The meaning of finite as a general term in grammar is related to that of finite in its every day sense: limited, bounded. Thus a finite verb is one that is limited by properties of person, number and tense (Huddleston 1988: 44). I believe the confusion about these terms has to do with their multiple uses in English.
FINITE/NONFINITE VERB FORMS: FINITE VERB FORMS:

This distinction applies to main verbs.

Third singular -s, past (-ed), other present tense forms (unmarked) -ing participle, -ed participle, (to) infinitive

of main verbs.
NONFINITE VERB FORMS:

FINITE/NONFINITE VPS/CLAUSES

The terms FINITE and NONFINITE are also applied to VPs2 and clauses. And the problem I think is that there is not a one-to-one correspondence between verb forms and the (finite) VPs or clauses that they may occur in. So, for example, in (1), was beginning is a finite VP even though the VP contains a nonfinite verb form (beginning, the -ing participle). The phrase is finite because it is tensed on the auxiliary (was is PAST); furthermore because the auxiliary is the verb be, person/number marking is apparent as well (was vs. were). (1) The doorbell rang as Pat was beginning his new novel

In other words, many finite VPs/clauses in English contain nonfinite forms (e.g. the PROGRESSIVE illustrated in (1) is composed of be + -ing participle; PERFECT constructions are formed with have + -ed participle). Note that the auxiliaries in these two constructionsthe PROGRESSIVE and the PERFECTare finite (minimally they carry tense). Huddleston (1988: 44) suggests that since the only reliable grammatical contrast present in English finite verbs is in fact tense (person and number being distinctions with limited distributions), then perhaps tensed would be a more appropriate term than finite for English. What about NONFINITE VPs/clauses? These would be VPs that do NOT contain verb forms that are tensed (or personed, or numbered, etc.). In (2) below, leaving is the -ing participle. There is no tensed auxiliary (or even a modal auxiliary; see below). In this case, then, both the verb form and the VP/clause are NONFINITE.

This handout is intended to clarify information in GQ: 41-43. Remember that VPs consist of a main verb standing alone as the entire VP, or can be preceded by one or multiple auxiliaries (e.g. The ship sank vs. The ship must have been sinking.)
2

(2)

Leaving the house so early, she forgot her lunch.

If the nonfinite VP in (2) were having left instead of leaving, then the nonfinite VP would be composed of two nonfinite formsthe -ing participle having and the -ed participle left. What about VPs/clauses that contain modal auxiliaries which are not marked for tense (e.g. *musted)? Modal auxiliaries, nonetheless, are considered finite, and their lack of overt tense or any other inflectional distinction is treated as a property of the modal auxiliary group. In summary, regarding VPs and clauses: The distinction between finite and nonfinite in English refers to the presence or absence of a tensed verb or auxiliary. Clauses [or VPs] that contain a tensed verb or auxiliary are considered finite clauses [or VPs]. Clauses [or VPs] that do not contain a tensed verb or auxiliary, but only an -ing form or an infinitive such as to leave, are considered nonfinite. (Hopper 1999: 16) Here is a link to a page on finite/nonfinite clauses with exercises http://www.ucl.ac.uk/internet-grammar/clauses/finite.htm

Exercises: Indicate whether the italicized VPs are finite (F) or nonfinite (N). 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. After hovering ( ) overhead, the helicopter suddenly descended ( ). The house had been painted ( ) a bright red before it was sold ( ). Murphy, beaten ( ) by the challenger, has retired ( ) from the ring. Overcome ( ) by grief, she sat ( ) silently. They dared to divorce ( ) before their children died ( ). Having been invited ( ), he should have arrived ( ) on time.

Answers 1. N, F 2. F, F 3. N, F 4. N, F 5. F, F 6. N, F

______________________
References Hopper, Paul J. 1999. A short course in grammar. NY: W.W. Norton. Huddleston, Rodney. 1988. English grammar: An outline. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.