# A Systematic Inventory of Modern Standard English Verb Constructions Reference verb: WRITE · Contemporary Standard English · Active and passive voice I will reorganize your original 205 entries into a consistent grammatical system, correct errors, add missing constructions, and exclude forms that are theoretically grammatical but extremely unnatural in ordinary modern English. The main principle is to separate verb-phrase constructions from sentence patterns. For example, writes, does not write, does he write?, and doesn't he write? should not all be counted as different morphological forms of write. They represent different combinations of inflection, auxiliary support, polarity, and question formation. ## 1. Classification and notation Each construction can be classified along several dimensions. | Dimension | Categories | | ------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | Finiteness | Finite, nonfinite | | Tense | Present, past; future reference through auxiliaries | | Aspect | Simple, progressive, perfect, perfect progressive | | Voice | Active, passive | | Polarity | Positive, negative | | Clause type | Declarative, interrogative, imperative | | Modality | Can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, would, ought to, etc. | | Agreement | Person and number | | Other constructions | Going to, used to, have to, had better, and others | In the tables below, I use she for active examples and the letter for passive examples, so that the sentences are grammatically and semantically natural. ## 2. Core finite constructions CORE INVENTORY # 20 selected tense–aspect–voice structures Each can be expressed as a positive statement, negative statement, question, or negative question. ### A. Active voice — 12 constructions | ID | Construction | Example | | --- | --------------------------- | --------------------------- | | A01 | Present simple | She writes. | | A02 | Present progressive | She is writing. | | A03 | Present perfect | She has written. | | A04 | Present perfect progressive | She has been writing. | | A05 | Past simple | She wrote. | | A06 | Past progressive | She was writing. | | A07 | Past perfect | She had written. | | A08 | Past perfect progressive | She had been writing. | | A09 | Future simple | She will write. | | A10 | Future progressive | She will be writing. | | A11 | Future perfect | She will have written. | | A12 | Future perfect progressive | She will have been writing. | All 12 are accepted and useful in contemporary standard English, although the future perfect progressive is less frequent. ### B. Passive voice — 8 constructions | ID | Construction | Example | | --- | --------------------------- | ---------------------------------- | | P01 | Present simple passive | The letter is written. | | P02 | Present progressive passive | The letter is being written. | | P03 | Present perfect passive | The letter has been written. | | P04 | Past simple passive | The letter was written. | | P05 | Past progressive passive | The letter was being written. | | P06 | Past perfect passive | The letter had been written. | | P07 | Future simple passive | The letter will be written. | | P08 | Future perfect passive | The letter will have been written. | These eight form a practical core inventory of passive constructions. The remaining four theoretical aspect/voice combinations are excluded from the core because they are extremely awkward: - has been being written - had been being written - will be being written - will have been being written These strings are not necessarily ungrammatical, but speakers overwhelmingly prefer alternative wording. They should be marked as marginal or excluded under your chosen criterion. ## 3. The four sentence patterns Each of the 20 core constructions can take four common clause patterns. Explore sentence-pattern combinations Present simple active Present perfect active Past progressive passive Future perfect progressive active Present simple active | Positive | She writes. | | ----------------- | ------------------- | | Negative | She does not write. | | Question | Does she write? | | Negative question | Doesn't she write? | This gives 80 core finite clause-pattern templates (20 × 4), before counting alternative agreement forms, contractions, modal combinations, or nonfinite forms. This is a count within this specific classification scheme, not a universal count of English verb forms. ## 4. Modal auxiliary constructions Modal auxiliaries are especially important because they allow many additional constructions beyond the traditional tense–aspect system. ### A. Basic modal constructions | ID | Construction | Example | | --- | ------------ | ----------------- | | M01 | can write | She can write. | | M02 | could write | She could write. | | M03 | may write | She may write. | | M04 | might write | She might write. | | M05 | must write | She must write. | | M06 | shall write | I shall write. | | M07 | should write | She should write. | | M08 | will write | She will write. | | M09 | would write | She would write. | Will write is also represented in the future-reference section. That overlap is intentional: the same construction can serve different grammatical functions. ### B. Modal + aspect and voice These structures combine a modal with other auxiliaries. | Code | Structure | Example | | ---- | ----------------------------------- | ----------------------------------- | | MB01 | Modal + base | She might write. | | MB02 | Modal + be + -ing | She might be writing. | | MB03 | Modal + have + past participle | She might have written. | | MB04 | Modal + have been + -ing | She might have been writing. | | MB05 | Modal + be + past participle | The letter might be written. | | MB06 | Modal + have been + past participle | The letter might have been written. | These six patterns can be combined with many modals, but not all combinations are equally natural or have the same meaning. Examples you omitted include: - can be written - could have written - could have been written - may be writing - may have written - might have been writing - must have written - must have been written - should be writing - should have been writing - should have been written - would have been written The modal can normally expresses present or general possibility/ability; could have written expresses a different kind of possibility or unrealized ability. This illustrates why structures should be classified by both form and meaning. ### C. Modal negation and questions For example, with should write: | Type | Example | | ----------------- | --------------------- | | Affirmative | She should write. | | Negative | She should not write. | | Question | Should she write? | | Negative question | Shouldn't she write? | Also distinguish She shouldn't write from She doesn't have to write: the first generally advises against writing, while the second indicates no obligation. ## 5. Semi-modal and related constructions Modern English has many multiword constructions that express necessity, obligation, intention, probability, habit, or expectation. | Code | Construction | Example | | ---- | --------------------- | -------------------------- | | S01 | have to write | She has to write. | | S02 | had to write | She had to write. | | S03 | will have to write | She will have to write. | | S04 | do not have to write | She doesn't have to write. | | S05 | have got to write | She's got to write. | | S06 | need to write | She needs to write. | | S07 | need not write | She needn't write. | | S08 | ought to write | She ought to write. | | S09 | ought to have written | She ought to have written. | | S10 | be supposed to write | She is supposed to write. | | S11 | be expected to write | She is expected to write. | | S12 | be allowed to write | She is allowed to write. | | S13 | be able to write | She is able to write. | | S14 | had better write | She had better write. | | S15 | would rather write | She would rather write. | | S16 | would sooner write | She would sooner write. | | S17 | dare not write | She dare not write. | | S18 | used to write | She used to write. | This category is not closed: there is no universally agreed boundary between a semi-modal, a catenative verb construction, and an ordinary verb taking an infinitival complement. For a disciplined inventory, I recommend recording those as separate subcategories. ## 6. Prospective and future-oriented constructions English expresses future time through more than will. | Code | Construction | Example | | ---- | -------------------------- | ------------------------------------- | | F01 | be going to write | She is going to write. | | F02 | be going to be writing | She is going to be writing. | | F03 | be going to have written | She is going to have written. | | F04 | be going to be written | The letter is going to be written. | | F05 | be about to write | She is about to write. | | F06 | be on the point of writing | She is on the point of writing. | | F07 | be to write | She is to write the report. | | F08 | be due to write | She is due to write the report. | | F09 | be set to write | She is set to write the report. | | F10 | be scheduled to write | She is scheduled to write the report. | The last few examples are not necessarily auxiliary-verb forms in the strict sense. Some are ordinary predicate constructions with adjectival or participial complements. They can still be included in a broader construction dictionary, provided you label their grammatical category. ## 7. Nonfinite verb constructions These are essential parts of your inventory. They do not independently express person or finite tense. ### A. Infinitives | Code | Construction | Example | | ---- | -------------------- | ---------------------------------------- | | I01 | to write | She hopes to write. | | I02 | to be writing | She hopes to be writing. | | I03 | to have written | She claims to have written it. | | I04 | to have been writing | She claims to have been writing. | | I05 | to be written | The report needs to be written. | | I06 | to have been written | The report appears to have been written. | | I07 | not to write | She decided not to write. | | I08 | not to have written | She claims not to have written it. | The base form without to is a bare infinitive in constructions such as can write, let her write, and make her write. ### B. Participial and gerund-participial constructions | Code | Construction | Example | | ---- | ------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- | | N01 | writing | Writing takes time. | | N02 | written | Written in haste, the note was unclear. | | N03 | being written | The report being written is confidential. | | N04 | having written | Having written the report, she rested. | | N05 | having been written | Having been written in haste, the report contained errors. | | N06 | not writing | Not writing regularly can be frustrating. | | N07 | not having written | Not having written the report, she had little to present. | Here writing can be a gerund-participle functioning in several syntactic environments. It is not always useful to treat every function as an additional verb form. ## 8. Imperative and hortative constructions Your original list has please write and let's write, but it needs a more systematic imperative section. | Code | Construction | Example | | ---- | --------------- | ----------------------- | | H01 | write | Write the letter. | | H02 | do not write | Don't write the letter. | | H03 | do write | Do write to me. | | H04 | please write | Please write soon. | | H05 | let's write | Let's write together. | | H06 | let's not write | Let's not write today. | | H07 | let me write | Let me write it. | | H08 | let her write | Let her write. | Note that please is not an auxiliary verb. It marks politeness, so please write is better classified as a pragmatic variant of an imperative. ## 9. Conditional and other dependent-clause constructions These are useful additional categories, but they require care because many do not introduce new morphological verb forms. | Code | Construction | Example | | ---- | ----------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | C01 | would write | She would write if she had time. | | C02 | would be writing | She would be writing if she were free. | | C03 | would have written | She would have written if she had known. | | C04 | would have been writing | She would have been writing if she hadn't been interrupted. | | C05 | would be written | The letter would be written if there were time. | | C06 | would have been written | The letter would have been written if she had known. | | C07 | were to write | If she were to write, I would read it. | | C08 | were to have written | If she were to have written it earlier, things might have been different. | | C09 | should write | If she should write, let me know. | | C10 | write (subjunctive) | I insist that she write the letter. | | C11 | not write (subjunctive) | I insist that she not write the letter. | The mandative subjunctive in C10–C11 is particularly important and absent from your original classification. It differs from ordinary third-person present writes. ## 10. Corrections to the original 205 Here is the cleanup policy I would apply to your existing identifiers. | Original IDs | Action | Reason | | ------------ | ------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | 001–016 | Retain | Present simple and perfect patterns | | 017–036 | Retain, with suitable subjects | Passive patterns are valid | | 037–068 | Retain | Progressive and perfect progressive patterns | | 069–076 | Exclude | Incorrect forms; natural corrected equivalents are extremely rare | | 077–116 | Retain | Past active and passive patterns | | 117–120 | Exclude | Incorrect forms; corrected equivalents are extremely rare | | 121–144 | Retain | Common future-reference constructions | | 145–152 | Exclude | Incorrect forms; corrected equivalents are extremely rare | | 153–158 | Retain | Common infinitival constructions | | 159–160 | Exclude | Extremely awkward progressive passive infinitives | | 161–199 | Retain with normalization | Reclassify modal, semi-modal, and imperative patterns | | 200–201 | Replace | Were to be and were to have been belong to a different base verb; use were to write, etc. | | 202–205 | Retain | Nonfinite, negative, and conditional patterns | You also have a duplicate numbering label at entry 166, which should read `EnglvmIndi.166`. One additional normalization: should not (I) write is an unusual position for the subject in modern standard English. Use Should I not write? or Shouldn't I write? ## 11. Recommended structure for your database If your intention is to create a systematic knowledge base, I recommend that every entry contain these fields: | Field | Example value | | --------------- | ---------------------- | | ID | EnglVerb.A03.NQ | | Lexeme | WRITE | | Construction | Present perfect active | | Tense | Present | | Aspect | Perfect | | Voice | Active | | Polarity | Negative | | Clause type | Interrogative | | Agreement | Third-person singular | | Surface form | Hasn't she written? | | Register | Standard | | Frequency class | Common | | Status | Accepted | | Original ID | 016 | This also makes it much easier to generate and validate patterns automatically. ## 12. What should the final count be? For the specified modern-standard-English inventory, I recommend keeping separate counts rather than claiming one absolute total. Core active structures # 12 Core passive structures # 8 Basic clause patterns # 4 Core pattern combinations # 80 The 80 templates exclude separate modal, semi-modal, nonfinite, conditional, imperative, and agreement variants. Several constructions also overlap across categories and should not be counted twice. The additional sections provide a structured extension, but they are not yet a fully enumerated, deduplicated master list of every accepted auxiliary combination. For example, might not have been written and shouldn't have been writing are generated by the modal rules without needing entirely new grammatical categories. My recommendation is to preserve your original 205 IDs as historical identifiers, create new normalized construction IDs, and maintain a mapping from each original entry to its corrected or excluded status. That would give you a more accurate and expandable linguistic resource than simply increasing the number from 205 to 250 or 300.