2

Why does the dove moan or the horse shake its mane? Or the lizard wait on the white wall then is gone?

Something about this, may seem strange to read, mostly near then is gone. Grammatically, and, maybe, in a proper sense, why may this seem, maybe, like this?

  • 1
    What do you think is strange? Please let us know. – Peter May 29 '17 at 2:17
  • (Native AmE) I think it's strange. Articulating why takes some effort. Explaining the feeling of strangeness may be very hard for a non-native. – Ben Kovitz May 29 '17 at 11:23
1

Because the auxiliary verb does governs the syntax, and does wants a non-finite form (moan, shake, wait), whereas is gone is finite. It could be "...then go?"

That statement about the dove, horse, and lizard is analogous to

Why does he ask then runs? ungrammatical

Grammatical would be

Why does he ask then run?

In contemporary standard English, does ... be is a no-go, so that "does ... be gone" is not a viable option:

Why does the dove moan or the horse shake its mane? Or the lizard wait on the white wall then be gone? non-standard

does...be is archaic in standard English, and is used now only in some (usually regional) dialects

  • So, I guess, from does, you may look for a non-finite(?) verb. So, does may work, with wait. [G]one may not work maybe, with does, as it may seem a maybe different shift? [G]o may work, for a shift, gone may work for a shift? So, I guess this works? Why may does, and runs, not, maybe, work? – saySay May 30 '17 at 0:13
  • When does is used as the auxiliary verb (as with questions), it combines with the bare infinitive: Why does the dove moan....why does the horse shake... why does the lizard wait. In the original passage , gone is the past participle of go; the relevant tensed verb is is: "...then is gone". – Tᴚoɯɐuo May 30 '17 at 0:53
  • I guess, I may not get, maybe, why does works with wait, and does may not work with goes. Maybe, why may this writer get to use gone, when I think you maybe stated, maybe. syntactically, does may request go. – saySay May 30 '17 at 3:21
  • It is not the verb per se which is at issue; rather it is whether the verb form is finite or non-finite. The rule is: does + {bare infinitive}. So does + is is not grammatical. Moreover, the auxiliary is in present tense. It modern English, does + be appears in dialects only, so it is ungrammatical to say does be gone. – Tᴚoɯɐuo May 30 '17 at 10:59
  • does + go is viable, as I said. But does + is gone or does + went are not viable. Those forms are nonviable because they are finite (tensed). gone is the past participle used as predicate adjective/subject complement and is not relevant to the question here. But is is relevant in ... is gone. – Tᴚoɯɐuo May 30 '17 at 11:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.