V2 word order

In syntax, verb-second (V2) word order is a specific restriction on the placement of the finite verb within a given clause or sentence. A V2 clause has the finite verb (the verb inflected for person) in second position with a single major constituent preceding it, which functions as the clause topic.

V2 word order is common across the Germanic languages and is also found in Indo-Aryan Kashmiri, Northeast Caucasian Ingush, Uto-Aztecan O'odham and fragmentarily in Rhaeto-Romansh Sursilvan. Among members of the Germanic family, English, which has predominantly SVO instead of V2 order, is an exception (although certain vestiges of the V2 phenomenon can also be found in English). Germanic languages and Kashmiri differ with respect to word order in embedded clauses.

Most Germanic languages do not normally use the V2 principle in embedded clauses, except in a certain semantic type of clause with certain verbs. Thus, German, Dutch and Afrikaans revert to VF (verb final) word order in embedded clauses. Two Germanic languages, Yiddish and Icelandic, allow V2 in all declarative clauses: main, embedded, and subordinate. Kashmiri has V2 in 'declarative content clauses' but VF order in relative clauses.

Examples

The following examples from German illustrate the V2 principle:

a.	Die Kinder	spielten	vor der Schule	im Park	Fußball.
	the kids	played	before school	in the park	football.
b.	Fußball	spielten	die Kinder	vor der Schule	im Park.
	'Football played the kids before school in the park.'
c.	Vor der Schule	spielten	die Kinder	im Park	Fußball.
	'Before school, played the kids in the park football.'
d.	Im Park	spielten	die Kinder	vor der Schule	Fußball.
	'In the park, played the kids before school football.'
e.	*Vor der Schule	Fußball	spielten	die Kinder	im Park.
	'Before school football played the kids in the park.'
f.	*Fußball	die Kinder	spielten	vor der Schule	im Park.
	'Football the kids played before school in the park.'

(The asterisk * is the standard means employed in linguistics to indicate that the example is grammatically unacceptable.) The sentences a–d, which are all perfectly acceptable, have the finite verb spielten in second position, whereby the major constituent which appears in the first position varies. The e and f sentences are bad because the finite verb no longer appears in second position there, but rather it has been pushed to the third position. The V2 principle allows any major constituent to occupy the first position as long as the second position is occupied by the finite verb.

The following examples from Dutch illustrate the V2 principle further:

a.	Ik	las	gisteren	dit boek.
	I	read	yesterday	this book.
b.	Dit boek	las	ik	gisteren.
	'This book read I yesterday.'
c.	Gisteren	las	ik	dit boek.
	'Yesterday read I this book.'
d.	*Dit boek	ik	las	gisteren.
	'This book I read yesterday.'
e.	*Gisteren	ik	las	dit boek.
	'Yesterday I read this book.'

We again see in sentence a–c that as long as the finite verb (here las) is in second position, the major constituent in first position is variable. When two (or more) major constituents appear before the finite verb as in sentences d and e, the V2 principle is violated and the sentence is bad. Data similar to these examples from German and Dutch could easily be produced for the other Germanic languages.

Non-finite verbs and embedded clauses

Non-finite verbs

The V2 principle regulates the position of finite verbs only; its influence on non-finite verbs (infinitives, participles, etc.) is thus indirect. Non-finite verbs in V2 languages appear in varying positions depending on the language at hand. In German and Dutch, for instance, non-finite verbs appear after the object (if one is present) in clause final position in main clauses, which means OV (object-verb) order is present in a sense. Swedish and Icelandic, in contrast, position non-finite verbs after the finite verb but before the object (if one is present), which means VO (verb-object) order is present. In this regard, it is important to understand that the V2 principle focuses on the finite verb only.

Embedded clauses

(In the following examples, finite verb forms are in bold, non-finite verb forms are in italics and subjects are underlined.)

The V2 principle may or may not be in force in embedded clauses depending on the (Germanic) language at hand. The languages fall into three groups.

Continental Scandinavian languages: Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Faroese

In these languages, the word order of clauses is generally fixed in two patterns of conventionally numbered positions. Both end with positions for (5) non-finite verb forms, (6) objects (7), adverbials.
In main clauses, the V2 constraint holds. The finite verb must be in position (2) and sentence adverbs in position (4). The latter include words with meanings such as 'not' and 'always'. The subject may be position (1), but when a topical expression occupies the position, the subject is in position (3).
In embedded clauses, the V2 constraint is absent. After the conjunction, the subject must immediately follow; it cannot be replaced by a topical expression. Thus, the first four positions are in the fixed order (1) conjunction, (2) subject, (3) sentence adverb, (4) finite verb

The position of the sentence adverbs is important to those theorists who see them as marking the start of a large constituent within the clause. Thus the finite verb is seen as inside that constituent in embedded clauses, but outside that constituent in V2 main clauses.

Swedish

main clause embedded clause		Front —	Finite verb Conjunction	Subject Subject	Sentence adverb Sentence adverb	— Finite verb	Non-finite verb Non-finite verb	Object Object	Adverbial Adverbial
main clause	a.	I dag	ville	Lotte	inte		läsa	tidningen
		1	2	3	4		5	6
		today	wanted	Lotte	not		read	the newspaper		...
		'Lotte didn't want to read the paper today.'
embedded clause	b.		att	Lotte	inte	ville	koka	kaffe	i dag
			1	2	3	4	5	6	7
			that	Lotte	not	wanted	brew	coffee	today	...
		'that Lotte didn't want to make coffee today'

Danish

main clause embedded clause		Front —	Finite verb Conjunction	Subject Subject	Sentence adverb Sentence adverb	— Finite verb	Non-finite verb Non-finite verb	Object Object	Adverbial Adverbial
main clause	a.	Klaus	er		ikke		kommet
		1	2		4		5
		Klaus	is		not		come
		...'Klaus hasn't come.'
embedded clause	b.		når	Klaus	ikke	er	kommet
			1	2	3	4	5
			when	Klaus	not	is	come
		...'when Klaus hasn't come'

Norwegian
(with multiple adverbials and multiple non-finite forms, in two varieties of the language)

main embedded

Front —

F vb Conj

Subj Subj

Sentence adverb Sentence adverb

— F vb

N-f vb N-f vb

Obj Obj

Adverbial Adverbial

Key:

Subj=Subject Obj=Object Conj=Conjunction, F vb= Finite verb N-f vb = Non-finite verb

main clause

a.

Den gangen

hadde

han

dessverre ikke

villet sende

sakspapirene

før møtet.

(Bokmål variety)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

this time

had

he

unfortunately not

wanted to send

documents

before the meeting

...

'This time he had unfortunately not wanted to send the documents before the meeting.'

embedded clause

b.

av di

han

denne gongen diverre ikkje

hadde

villa senda

sakspapira

føre møtet.

(Nynorsk variety)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

because

he

this time unfortunately not

had

wanted to send

documents

before the meeting

...

'because this time he had unfortunately not wanted to send the documents before the meeting.'

Faroese
Unlike other continental Scandinavian languages, the sentence adverb may either precede or follow the finite verb in embedded clauses. A (3a) slot is inserted here for the following sentence adverb alternative.

main clause embedded clause

Front —

Finite verb Conjunction

Subject Subject

S-adv S-adv

— Finite verb

— S-adv

Non-finite verb Non-finite verb

Object Object

Adverbial Adverbial

Key: S-adv=Sentence adverb

main clause

a.

Her

man

fólk

ongantíð

hava fingið

fisk

fyrr

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

here

must

people

never

have caught

fish

before

...

'People have surely never caught fish here before.'

embedded clause

b.

hóast

fólk

ongantíð

hevur

fingið

fisk

here

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

although

people

never

have

caught

fish

here

c.

hóast

fólk

hevur

ongantíð

fingið

fisk

here

1

2

4

(3a)

5

6

7

although

people

have

never

caught

fish

here

...

'although people have never caught fish here'

German, Dutch, Afrikaans

In these languages there is a strong tendency to place some or all of the verb forms in final position.

In main clauses, the V2 constraint holds. As with other Germanic languages, the finite verb must be in the second position. However, any non-finite forms must be in final position. The subject may be in the first position, but when a topical expression occupies the position, the subject follows the finite verb.
In embedded clauses, the V2 constraint does not hold. The finite verb form must be adjacent to any non-finite at the end of the clause, with different word-order in different languages.

German grammarians traditionally divide sentences into fields. Subordinate clauses preceding the main clause are said to be in the first field (Vorfeld), clauses following the main clause in the final field (Nachfeld).
The central field (Mittelfeld ) contains most or all of a clause, and is bounded by left bracket (Linke Satzklammer) and right bracket (Rechte Satzklammer) positions.

In main clauses, the initial element (subject or topical expression) is said to be located in the first field, the V2 finite verb form in the left bracket, and any non-finite verb forms in the right bracket.
In embedded clauses, the conjunction is said to be located in the left bracket, and the verb forms in the right bracket. In German embedded clauses, a finite verb form follows any non-finite forms.

German

		First field	Left bracket	Central field				Right bracket			Final field
Main clause	a.	Er	hat	dich	gestern	nicht		angerufen			weil er dich nicht stören wollte.
		he	has	you	yesterday	not		rung
		... 'He didn't ring you yesterday because he didn't want to disturb you.'
	b.	Sobald er Zeit hat	wird	er	dich			anrufen
			will	he	you			ring
		...'When he has time he will ring you.'
Embedded clause	c.		dass	er	dich	gestern	nicht	angerufen hat
			that	he	you	yesterday	not	rung has
		...'that he didn't ring you yesterday'

Dutch

		First field	Left bracket	Central field				Right bracket		Final field
Main clause	a.	Tasman	heeft	Nieuw-Zeeland				ontdekt
		Tasman	has	New Zealand				discovered
		...'Tasman discovered New Zealand.'
	b.	In 1642	ontdekte	Tasman	Nieuw-Zeeland
		In 1642	discovered	Tasman	New Zealand
		...'In 1642 Tasman discovered New Zealand.'
	c.	Niemand	had					gedacht		dat ook maar iets zou gebeuren.
		Nobody	had					thought
		...'Nobody figured that anything would happen.'
Embedded clause	d.		dat	Tasman	Nieuw-Zeeland			ontdekt heeft
			that	Tasman	New Zealand			discovered has
		...'that Tasman discovered New Zealand'

This analysis suggests a close parallel between the V2 finite form in main clauses and the conjunctions in embedded clauses. Each is seen as an introduction to its clause-type, a function which some modern scholars have equated with the notion of specifier. The analysis is supported in spoken Dutch by the placement of clitic pronoun subjects. Forms such as ie cannot stand alone, unlike the full-form equivalent hij. The words to which they may be attached are those same introduction words: the V2 form in a main clause, or the conjunction in an embedded clause.

		First field	Left bracket	Central field					Right bracket		Final field
Main clause	e.	In 1642	ontdekte-n-ie	Nieuw-Zeeland
		In 1642	discovered-(euphonic n)-he	New Zealand
		...'In 1642 he discovered New Zealand.'
Embedded clause	f.		dat-ie	in 1642	Nieuw-Zeeland				ontdekt heeft
			that-he	in 1642	New Zealand				discovered has
		...'that he discovered New Zealand in 1642'

Dutch differs from German in its word order in subordinate clause. In Dutch subordinate clauses two word orders are possible for the verb clusters and are referred to as the "red": omdat ik heb gewerkt, "because I have worked": like in English, where the auxiliary verb precedes the past particle, and the "green": omdat ik gewerkt heb, where the past particle precedes the auxiliary verb, "because I worked have": like in German. In Dutch, the green word order is the most used in speech, and the red is the most used in writing, particularly in journalistic texts, but the green is also used in writing as is the red in speech. Unlike in English however adjectives and adverbs must precede the verb: ''dat het boek groen is'', "that the book is green"

		First field	Left bracket	Central field				Right bracket		Final field
Embedded clause	g.		omdat	ik	het	dan		gezien zou hebben		most common in the Netherlands
			because	I	it	then		seen would have
	h.		omdat	ik	het	dan		zou gezien hebben		most common in Belgium
			because	I	it	then		would seen have
	i.		omdat	ik	het	dan		zou hebben gezien		often used in writing in both countries, but common in speech as well, most common in Limburg
			because	I	it	then		would have seen
	j.		omdat	ik	het	dan		gezien hebben zou		used in Friesland, Groningen and Drenthe, least common but used as well
			because	I	it	then		seen have would
		...'because then I would have seen it'

Icelandic and Yiddish

These languages freely allow V2 order in embedded clauses.

Icelandic
Two word-order patterns are largely similar to continental Scandinavian. However, in main clauses an extra slot is needed for when the front position is occupied by Það. In these clauses the subject follows any sentence adverbs. In embedded clauses, sentence adverbs follow the finite verb (an optional order in Faroese).

main clause embedded clause

Front —

Finite verb Conjunction

Subject Subject

— Finite verb

Sentence adverb Sentence adverb

Subject —

Non-finite verb Non-finite verb

Object Object

Adverbial Adverbial

main clause

a.

Margir

höfðu

aldrei

lokið

verkefninu.

Many

had

never

finished

the assignment

...

'Many had never finished the assignment.'

b.

Það

höfðu

aldrei

margir

lokið

verkefninu.

there

have

never

many

finished

the assignment

...

'There were never many people who had finished the assignment.'

c.

Bókina

hefur

María

ekki

lesið.

the book

has

Mary

not

read

...

'Mary hasn't read the book.'

embedded clause

d.

hvort

María

hefur

ekki

lesið

bokina.

whether

Mary

has

not

read

the book

...

'whether Mary hasn't read the book'

In more radical contrast with other Germanic languages, a third pattern exists for embedded clauses with the conjunction followed by the V2 order: front-finite verb-subject.

Conjunction Front
(Topic adverbial) Finite verb Subject e. Jón efast um að á morgun fari María snemma á fætur. John doubts that tomorrow get Mary early up ... 'John doubts that Mary will get up early tomorrow.' Conjunction Front
(Object) Finite verb Subject f. Jón harmar að þessa bók skuli ég hafa lesið. John regrets that this book shall I have read ... 'John regrets that I have read this book.'

Yiddish
Unlike Standard German, Yiddish normally has verb forms before Objects (SVO order), and in embedded clauses has conjunction followed by V2 order.

Front (Subject)

Finite verb

Conjunction

Front (Subject)

Finite verb

a.

ikh

hob

gezen

mitvokh,

az

ikh

vel

nit

kenen

kumen

donershtik

I

have

seen

Wednesday

that

I

will

not

can

come

Thursday

...

'I saw on Wednesday that I wouldn't be able to come on Thursday.'

Front (Adverbial)

Finite verb

Subject

Conjunction

Front (Adverbial)

Finite verb

Subject

b.

mitvokh

hob

ikh

gezen,

az

donershtik

vel

ikh

nit

kenen

kumen

Wednesday

have

I

seen

that

Thursday

will

I

not

can

come

...

On Wednesday I saw that on Thursday I wouldn't be able to come.'

Root clauses

One type of embedded clause with V2 following the conjunction is found throughout the Germanic languages, although it is more common in some than it is others. These are termed root clauses. They are declarative content clauses, the direct objects of so-called bridge verbs, which are understood to quote a statement. For that reason, they exhibit the V2 word order of the equivalent direct quotation.

Danish
Items other than the subject are allowed to appear in front position.

			Conjunction	Front (Subject)		Finite verb
a.	Vi	ved	at	Bo	ikke	har	læst	denne bog
	We	know	that	Bo	not	has	read	this book	...	'We know that Bo has not read this book.'
			Conjunction	Front (Object)	Finite verb	Subject
b.	Vi	ved	at	denne bog	har	Bo	ikke	læst
	We	know	that	this book	has	Bo	not	read	...	'We know that Bo has not read this book.'

Swedish
Items other than the subject are occasionally allowed to appear in front position. Generally, the statement must be one with which the speaker agrees.

			Conjunction	Front (Adverbial)	Finite verb	Subject
d.	Jag	tror	att	i det fallet	har	du	rätt
	I	think	that	in that respect	have	you	right	...	'I think that in that respect you are right.'

This order is not possible with a statement with which the speaker does not agree.

				Conjunction	Front (Adverbial)	Finite verb	Subject
e.	*Jag	tror	inte	att	i det fallet	har	du	rätt			(The asterisk signals that the sentence is not grammatically acceptable.)
	I	think	not	that	in that respect	have	you	right	...	'I don't think that in that respect you are right.'

Norwegian

			Conjunction	Front (Adverbial)	Finite verb	Subject
f.	hun	fortalte	at	til fødselsdagen	hadde	hun	fått	kunstbok			(Bokmål variety)
	she	told	that	for her birthday	had'	she	received	art-book	...	'She said that for her birthday she had been given a book on art.'

German
Root clause V2 order is possible only when the conjunction dass is omitted.

			Conjunction	Front (Subject)	Finite verb
g.	*Er	behauptet,	dass	er	hat	es	zur Post	gebracht			(The asterisk signals that the sentence is not grammatically acceptable.)
h.	Er	behauptet,		er	hat	es	zur Post	gebracht
	he	claims	(that)	he	has	it	to the post office	taken	...	'He claims that he took it to the post office.'

Compare the normal embed-clause order after dass

			Left bracket (Conjunction)	Central field	Right bracket (Verb forms)
i.	Er	behauptet,	dass	er es zur Post	gebracht hat
	he	claims	that	he it to the post office	taken has

V2 in English

Modern English differs greatly in word order from other modern Germanic languages, but earlier English shared many similarities. Some scholars therefore propose a description of Old English with V2 constraint as the norm. The history of English syntax is thus seen as a process of losing the constraint.

Old English

In these examples, finite verb forms are in bold, non-finite verb forms are in italics and subjects are underlined.

Main clauses

Subject first

a.	Se	mæssepreost	sceal	manum	bodian	þone	soþan	geleafan
	the	masspriest	must	people	preach	the	true	faith	....	'The mass priest must preach the true faith to the people.'

Question word first

b.	Hwi	wolde	God	swa	lytles	þinges	him	forwyrman
	Why	would	God	so	small	thing	him	deny	....	'Why would God deny him such a small thing?'

Topic phrase first

c.	on	twam	þingum	hæfde	God	þæs	mannes	sawle	gedodod
	in	two	things	had	God	the	man's	soul	endowed	....	'With two things God had endowed man's soul.'

þa first

c.	þa	wæs	þæt	folc	þæs	micclan	welan	ungemetlice	brucende
	then	was	the	people	of-the	great	prosperity	excessively	partaking	....	'Then the people were partaking excessively of the great prosperity.'

Negative word first

d.	Ne	sceal	he	naht	unaliefedes	don
	not	shall	he	nothing	unlawful	do	....	'He shall not do anything unlawful.'

Object first

e.	Ðas	ðreo	ðing	forgifð	God	his	gecorenum
	these	three	things	gives	God	his	chosen	....	'These three things God gives to his chosen.'

Position of object

In examples b,c and d, the object of the clause precedes a non-finite verb form. Superficially, the structure is verb-subject-object- verb. To capture generalities, scholars of syntax and linguistic typology treat them as basically subject-object-verb (SOV) structure, modified by the V2 constraint. Thus Old English is classified, to some extent, as an SOV language. However, example a represents a number of Old English clauses with object following a non-finite verb form, with the superficial structure verb-subject-verb object. A more substantial number of clauses contain a single finite verb form followed by an object, superficially verb-subject-object. Again, a generalisation is captured by describing these as subject–verb–object (SVO) modified by V2. Thus Old English can be described as intermediate between SOV languages (like German and Dutch) and SVO languages (like Swedish and Icelandic).

Effect of subject pronouns

When the subject of a clause was a personal pronoun, V2 did not always operate.

f.

forðon

we

sceolan

mid

ealle

mod

&

mægene

to

Gode

gecyrran

therefore

we

must

with

all

mind

and

power

to

God

turn

....

'Therefore we must turn to God with all our mind and power.'

However, V2 verb-subject inversion occurred without exception after a question word or the negative ne, and with few exceptions after þa even with pronominal subjects.

g.	for	hwam	noldest	þu	ðe sylfe	me	gecgyðan	þæt...
	for	what	not-wanted	you	yourself	me	make-known	that..	....	'wherefore would you not want to make known to me yourself that...'

h.	Ne	sceal	he	naht	unaliefedes	don
	not	shall	he	nothing	unlawful	do	....	'He shall not do anything unlawful.'

i.	þa	foron	hie	mid	þrim	scipum	ut
	then	sailed	they	with	three	ships	out	....	'Then they sailed out with three ships.'

Inversion of a subject pronoun also occurred regularly after a direct quotation.

j.	"Me	is,"	cwæð	hēo,	"Þīn	cyme	on	miclum	ðonce"
	to me	is	said	she	your	coming	in	much	thankfulness	....	'"Your coming," she said, " is very gratifying to me".'

Embedded clauses

Embedded clauses with pronoun subjects were not subject to V2. Even with noun subjects, V2 inversion did not occur.

k.

...

þa ða

his

leorningcnichtas

hine

axodon

for

hwæs

synnum

se

man

wurde

swa

blind

acenned

...

when

his

disciples

him

asked

for

whose

sins

the

man

became

thus

blind

....

'... when his disciples asked him for whose sins the man was thus born blind'

Yes-No questions

In a similar clause pattern, the finite verb form of a yes-no question occupied the first position

l.

Truwast

ðu

nu

þe

selfum

and

þinum

geferum

bet

þonne

ðam

apostolum...?

trust

you

now

you

self

and

your

companions

better

than

the

apostles

....

'Do you now trust yourself and your companions better than the apostles...?'

Middle English

Continuity

Early Middle English generally preserved V2 structure in clauses with nominal subjects.

Topic phrase first

a.	On	þis	gær	wolde	þe	king	Stephne	tæcen	Rodbert
	in	this	year	wanted	the	king	Stephen	seize	Robert	....	'During this year king Stephen wanted to seize Robert.'

Nu first

b.	Nu	loke	euerich	man	toward	himseluen
	now	look	every	man	to	himself	....	'Now it's for every man to look to himself.'

As in Old English, V2 inversion did not apply to clauses with pronoun subjects.

Topic phrase first

c.	bi	þis	ȝe	mahen	seon	ant	witen...
	by	this	you	may	see	and	know

Object first

d.	alle	ðese	bebodes	ic	habbe	ihealde	fram	childhade
	all	these	commandments	I	have	kept	from	childhood

Change

Late Middle English texts of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries show increasing incidence of clauses without the inversion associated with V2.

Topic adverb first

e.	sothely	se	ryghtwyse	sekys	þe	Ioye	and ...
	Truly	the	righteous	seeks	the	joy	and...

Topic phrase first

f.	And	by	þis	same	skyle	hop	and	sore	shulle	jugen	us
	And	by	this	same	skill	hope	and	sorrow	shall	judge	us

Negative clauses were no longer formed with ne (or na) as the first element. Inversion in negative clauses was attributable to other causes.

Wh- question word first

g.	why	ordeyned	God	not	such	ordre
	why	ordained	God	not	such an	order	....	'Why did God not ordain such an order?'	(not follows noun phrase subject)
h.	why	shulde	he	not ..
	Why	should	he	not...					(not precedes pronoun subject)

There first

h.	Ther	nys	nat	oon	kan	war	by	other	be
	there	not-is	not	one	can	aware	by	other	be	....	'There is not a single person who learns from the mistakes of others'

Object first

h.	He	was	despeyred;	no thyng	dorste	he	seye
	He	was	in despair;	nothing	dared	he	say

Vestiges of V2 in Modern English

As in earlier periods, Modern English normally has subject-verb order in declarative clauses and inverted verb-subject order in interrogative clauses. However these norms are observed irrespective of the number of clause elements preceding the verb. Moreover, it is not useful to characterize the verb form which undergoes inversion as 'the finite verb'.

Classes of verbs in Modern English: auxiliary and lexical

Inversion in Old English sentences with a combination of two verbs could be described in terms of their finite and non-finite forms. The word which participated in inversion was the finite verb; the verb which retained its position relative to the Object was the non-finite verb. In most types of Modern English clause, there are two verb forms, but the verbs are considered to belong to different syntactic classes. The verbs which participated in inversion have evolved to form a class of auxiliary verbs which may mark tense, aspect and mood; the remaining majority of verbs with full semantic value are said to constitute the class of lexical verbs. The exceptional type of clause is that of declarative clause with a lexical verb in a Present simple or Past simple form.

Questions

Interrogative Wh- questions (like Yes/No questions) are regularly formed with inversion of subject and auxiliary. Present Simple and Present Past questions are formed with the auxiliary do, a process known as do-support.

a. Which games is Sam watching?

b. Where does she live?

(see subject-auxiliary inversion in questions)

With topic adverbs and adverbial phrases

In certain patterns similar to Old and Middle English, inversion is possible. However, this is a matter of stylistic choice, unlike the constraint on interrogative clauses.

negative or restrictive adverbial first

c. At no point will he drink Schnapps.

d. No sooner had she arrived than she started to make demands.

(see negative inversion)

comparative adverb or adjective first

e. So keenly did the children miss their parents, they cried themselves to sleep.

f. Such was their sadness, they could never enjoy going out.

After the preceding classes of adverbial, only auxiliary verbs, not lexical verbs, participate in inversion

locative or temporal adverb first

g. Here comes the bus.

h. Now is the hour when we must say goodbye.

prepositional phrase first

i. Behind the goal sat many photographers.

j. Down the road came the person we were waiting for.

(see locative inversion, directive inversion)

After the two latter types of adverbial, only one-word lexical verb forms (Present Simple or Past Simple), not auxiliary verbs, participate in inversion, and only with noun-phrase subjects, not pronominal subjects.

Direct quotations

When the object of a verb is a verbatim quotation, it may precede the verb, with a result similar to Old English V2. Such clauses are found in storytelling and in news reports.

k. "Wolf! Wolf!" cried the boy.

l. "The unrest is spreading throughout the country" writes our Jakarta correspondent.

(see quotative inversion)

Declarative clauses without inversion

Corresponding to the above examples, the following clauses show the normal Modern English subject-verb order.

Declarative equivalents

a′. Sam is watching the Cup games.

b′. She lives in the country.

Equivalents without topic fronting

c′. He will at no point drink Schnapps.

d′. She had no sooner arrived than she started to make demands.

e′. The children missed their parents so keenly that they cried themselves to sleep.

g′. The bus is coming here.

h′. The hour when we must say goodbye is now.

i′. Many photographers sat behind the goal.

j′. The person we were waiting for came down the road.

k′. The boy cried "Wolf! Wolf!"

l′. Our Jakarta correspondent writes, "The unrest is spreading throughout the country" .

V2 in Old French

Modern French is a Subject-Verb-Object (SVO) language which is derived, like other Romance languages, from Latin, which is a Subject-Object-Verb (SOV) language. However, there are more instances of V2 constructions in Old French than in other early Romance language texts. It has been suggested that this may be due to influence from the Germanic Frankish language. The following sentences have been identified as possible examples of V2 syntax:

a.	Old French	Longetemps	fu	ly	roys	Elinas	en	la	montaigne
	Modern French	Longtemps	fut	le	roi	Elinas	dans	la	montagne	....	'Pendant longtemps le roi Elinas a été dans les montagnes.'
	English	For a long time	was	the	king	Elinas	in	the	mountain	...	'King Elinas was in the mountains for a long time.'

b.	Old French	Iteuses	paroles	distrent	li	frere	de	Lancelot
	Modern French	Telles	paroles	dirent	les	frères	de	Lancelot	....	'Les frères de Lancelot ont dit ces paroles'
	English	Such	words	uttered	the	brothers	of	Lancelot	....	'Lancelot's brothers spoke these words.'

c.	Old French	Atant	regarda	contreval	la	mer
	Modern French	Alors	regarda	en bas	la	mer	....	'Alors Il a regardé la mer plus bas.'
	English	Then	looked at	downward	the	sea	....	'Then he looked down at the sea.' (Elision of subject pronoun, contrary to the general rule in other Old French clause structures.)

Other V2 languages

Kashmiri

As was first noted in 1914 by Jules Bloch, V2 word order occurs outside of Germanic, in the Indo-Aryan language Kashmiri. Declarative main clauses as well as embedded object clauses in Kashmiri have V2 word order, but relative clauses have SOV order, e.g.

• Basic sentence

  mye per yi kyitāb az.

  I read this book today.

• With fronted adverb

  az per mye yi kyitāb.

  Today read I this book.

• Subordinate clause

  mye von zyi mye per yi kyitāb az.

  I said that I read this book today.

• Subordinate clause with fronted adverb

  mye von zyi az per mye yi kyitāb.

  I said that today read I this book.

• Relative clause

  yi chi swa kyitāb ywas mye rāth per.

  This is the book I yesterday read.

• Relative clause with embedded subordinate clause

  yi chi swa kyitāb ywas mye az veny zyi mye per rāth.

  This is the book I today said that I read yesterday.

Kashmiri differs from the V2 languages of Europe in that in all clause types Kashmiri exhibits the characteristics of SOV languages. It has postpositions (not prepositions), objects before the main verb (not after - unless the main verb itself is in position 2), and auxiliaries after main verbs (unless the auxiliary itself is in position 2) [example from 'saaykal' by Ratan Lal Shant]:

khaar oos rinyoomut Tyuub lemy-lemy Tayr-i manz-i nyebar keD-yith tshun-aan.

mechanic was worn.out tube pulling-pulling tire-Abl inside-Abl out take.out-Ger THROW-ing

'The mechanic was pulling the worn-out tube out of the tire.'

The postposition manzi 'from inside' follows its object Tayri. The direct object Tyuub precedes its verb keD- 'take out'. The compound verb auxiliary tshun- THROW follows the main verb keD-.

Kotgarhi and Kochi

In his 1976 three-volume study of two Indo-Aryan languages of Himachal Pradesh, Hendriksen reports on two intermediate cases: Kotgarhi and Kochi. Although neither language shows a regular V-2 pattern, they have evolved to the point that main and subordinate clauses differ in word order and auxiliaries may separate from other parts of the verb:

• hyunda-baassie jaa gõrmi hõ-i (Kotgarhi)

  winter-after GOES summer become-Gerund

  After winter comes summer. (Hendriksen III:186)

Hendriksen reports that relative clauses in Kochi show a greater tendency to have the finite verbal element in clause-final position than matrix clauses do (III:188).

Ingush

In Ingush, "for main clauses, other than episode-initial and other all-new ones, verb-second order is most common. The verb, or the finite part of a compound verb or analytic tense form (i.e. the light verb or the auxiliary), follows the first word or phrase in the clause."

muusaa vy hwuona telefon jettazh

Musa V.PROG 2sg.DAT telephone striking

'Musa is telephoning you.'

O'odham

O'odham has relatively free word order within clauses; for example, all of the following sentences mean "the boy brands the pig":

• ceoj ʼo g ko:jĭ ceposid
• ko:jĭ ʼo g ceoj ceposid
• ceoj ʼo ceposid g ko:jĭ
• ko:jĭ ʼo ceposid g ceoj
• ceposid ʼo g ceoj g ko:jĭ
• ceposid ʼo g ko:jĭ g ceoj

Despite the general freedom of sentence word order, O'odham is fairly strictly verb-second in its placement of the auxiliary verb (in the above sentences, it is ʼo; in the following it is ʼañ):

• Affirmative: cipkan ʼañ = "I am working"
• Negative: pi ʼañ cipkan = "I am not working" [not *pi cipkan ʼañ]

Sursilvan

Among dialects of the Romansh, V2 word order is limited to Sursilvan, the insertion of entire phrases between auxiliary verbs and participles occurs, as in 'Cun Mariano Tschuor ha Augustin Beeli discurriu ' ('Mariano Tschuor has spoken with Augustin Beeli'), as compared to Engadinese 'Cun Rudolf Gasser ha discurrü Gion Peider Mischol' ('Rudolf Gasser has spoken with Gion Peider Mischol'.)

The constituent that is bounded by the auxiliary, ha, and the participle, discurriu, is known as a Satzklammer or 'verbal bracket'.

Structural analysis of V2 in Dependency Grammar

Dependency grammar (DG) can accommodate the V2 phenomenon simply by stipulating that one and only one constituent can be a predependent of the finite verb (i.e. a dependent which precedes its head) in declarative (matrix) clauses (in this, Dependency Grammar assumes only one clausal level and one position of the verb, instead of a distinction between a VP-internal and a higher clausal position of the verb as in Generative Grammar, cf. the next section). On this account, the V2 principle is violated if the finite verb has more than one predependent or no predependent at all. The following DG structures of the first four German sentences above illustrate the analysis (the sentence means 'The kids play soccer in the park before school'):

The finite verb spielen is the root of all clause structure. The V2 principle requires that this root have a single predependent, which it does in each of the four sentences.

The four English sentences above involving the V2 phenomenon receive the following analyses:

Structural analysis in Generative Grammar

In the theory of Generative Grammar, the verb second phenomenon has been described as an application of X-bar theory. The combination of a first position for a phrase and a second position for a single verb has been identified as the combination of specifier and head of a phrase. The part after the finite verb is then the complement. While the sentence structure of English is usually analysed in terms of three levels, CP, IP, and VP, in German linguistics the consensus has emerged that there is no IP in German.

Tree structure for the English clause. German does not use an "I" position and has a VP with the verb at the end.

The VP (verb phrase) structure assigns position and functions to the arguments of the verb. Hence, this structure is shaped by the grammatical properties of the V (verb) which heads the structure. The CP (complementizer phrase) structure incorporates the grammatical information which identifies the clause as declarative or interrogative, main or embedded. The structure is shaped by the abstract C (complementiser) which is considered the head of the structure. In embedded clauses the C position accommodates subordinating conjunctions. In German declarative main clauses, C hosts the finite verb. Thus the V2 structure is analysed as

1 Topic element (specifier of CP)

2 Finite-verb form (C=head of CP) i.e. verb-second

3 Remainder of the clause

In embedded clauses, the C position is occupied by a conjunction.In most Germanic languages (but not in Icelandic or Yiddish), this generally prevents the finite verb from moving to C.

The structure is analysed as

1 Conjunction (C=head of CP)

2 Bulk of clause (VP), including, in German, the subject.

3 Finite verb (V position)

This analysis does not provide a structure for the instances in some language of root clauses after bridge verbs.

Example: Danish Vi ved at denne bog har Bo ikke læst with the object of the embedded clause fronted.

(Literally 'We know that this book has Bo not read')

The solution is to allow verbs such as ved to accept a clause with a second (recursive) CP.

The conjunction occupies C position in the upper CP.

The finite verb moves to the C position in the lower CP.

Literature

• Adger, D. 2003. Core syntax: A minimalist approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Ágel, V., L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H. Heringer, and H. Lobin (eds.) 2003/6. Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
• Borsley, R. 1996. Modern phrase structure grammar. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
• Carnie, A. 2007. Syntax: A generative introduction, 2nd edition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
• Emonds, J. 1976. A transformational approach to English syntax: Root, structure-preserving, and local transformations. New York: Academic Press.
• Fagan, S.M.B. 2009. German: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Fischer, O., A. van Kermenade, W. Koopman, and W. van der Wurff. 2000. The Syntax of Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Fromkin, V. et al. 2000. Linguistics: An introduction to linguistic theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
• Harber, Wayne. 2007. The Germanic Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hook, P.E. 1976. Is Kashmiri an SVO Language? Indian Linguistics 37: 133-142.
• Liver, Ricarda. 2009. Deutsche Einflüsse im Bündnerromanischen. In Elmentaler, Michael (Hrsg.) Deutsch und seine Nachbarn. Peter Lang. ISBN 978-3-631-58885-7
• König, E. and J. van der Auwera (eds.). 1994. The Germanic Languages. London and New York: Routledge.
• Liver, Ricarda. 2009. Deutsche Einflüsse im Bündnerromanischen. In Elmentaler, Michael (Hrsg.) Deutsch und seine Nachbarn. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
• Nichols, Johanna. 2011. Ingush Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Osborne T. 2005. Coherence: A dependency grammar analysis. SKY Journal of Linguistics 18, 223-286.
• Ouhalla, J. 1994. Transformational grammar: From rules to principles and parameters. London: Edward Arnold.
• Peters, P. 2013. The Cambridge Dictionary of English Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Posner, R. 1996. The Romance languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rowlett, P. 2007. The Syntax of French. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• van Riemsdijk, H. and E. Williams. 1986. Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
• Tesnière, L. 1959. Éleménts de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.
• Thráinsson, H. 2007. The Syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Zwart, J-W. 2011. The Syntax of Dutch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.