English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I’m wondering how I can structurally determine when a verb is being used as a copula and when it is not. Specifically, is the verb “appear” followed by a verb NECESSARILY a copula (i.e., linking verb)?

One of my references (“An A-Z of English Grammar & Usage”, Longman, p.271), describes the following pattern for linking verbs:

Other patterns typical of linking verbs


However, I cannot find a source that says that “appear” followed by any verb (such as in the following example) is always a linking verb:

Sarah appeared to have won.

share|improve this question

On the previous page, your reference says that appear is a linking verb when the sentence in which it occurs is on either pattern (A) or pattern (B) as shown on page 270, and gives the examples The children appear happy enough and This appeared the only solution. A footnote points out that the second of those is very rare in American English, where patterns (D) or (E) can be used instead.

I haven’t tested this proposition, but my intuition is that appear is a linking verb when it can be replaced by seem. It is clearly not a linking verb when used intransitively with the meaning ‘come into view’.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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