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

The existential 'there' is usually followed by a form of the verb 'to be', used as a pure copula.

For instance, rather than saying, a wrench is on the bench, you'd say there's a wrench on the bench.

Biber, Conrad and Leech (2002) list a number of syncategorematic/copular verbs which can also follow the existential 'there', eg:

There used to be a house ... there's supposed to be a plot ... there seems to have been a mistake ... there's said to be a ghost ...

They don't make a distinction which I've noticed about what I call 'emergent-type' verbs, always used in the past, describing, as I see it, an action which has emerged, but seems as yet incomplete, eg:

...there arose such as clatter ... there appeared a great multitude ... there emerged, out of the freshly tilled soil, ...

I noticed today another type which I hadn't clocked before ... the use of the intransitive after 'Once upon a time', eg:

Once upon a time, there lived ...

I can't think of an instance where you'd use a transitive verb in this construction.

Are there any other types of verbs that can follow the existential 'there' in declarative sentences that you know of that I can add to my list?

share|improve this question
There-Insertion, as the rule is known, works with most locative verbs and quite a few others. It's discussed in Levin's book on Verb Classes and Alternations, and I made a homework problem out of the list given there. – John Lawler Mar 22 '14 at 21:40
Your first list is not actually about other verbs that can follow there: in each of those cases, there still goes with be, it's just that a raising verb has stepped in to obscure this. – ruakh Mar 23 '14 at 6:49
Also, for your second list, it's not true that these are only found in the past; we can also say "if there should arise [...]", "soon there will emerge [...]", and so on. (These are well-attested.) I think what you're sensing is that these verbs are perfective in sense. Perfective verbs are less common in the present tense, because they can't describe ongoing states; but they can appear in the present, e.g. when describing a repeated event: "every day, there appears [...]". – ruakh Mar 23 '14 at 6:53
By the way, you might be interested in the definitions and examples at en.wiktionary.org/wiki/there#Pronoun. (Full disclosure: I wrote them, several years ago.) The (not very detailed) breakdown there, which I still agree with, takes a different approach than yours, which is why I can't answer your question about "other types of verbs": your taxonomy is such that it's incomplete, but I don't see how to complete it compatibly. – ruakh Mar 23 '14 at 7:03
@ruakh That was a really helpful comment about the perfective aspect - which I understand to be contrasted with the imperfective aspect of verbs - can emergence or appearance ever be said to be perfective in sense? I'm not sure. The only conclusion I've come to so far, acknowledging what you've pointed out, but trying to make sense of it in my head is that the existential 'there' can't be used with the progressive or imperfect tense. Would you agree? – Leon Conrad Mar 23 '14 at 10:24

You might be interested in the related topic of the presentational construction.

In form, the presentational construction uses the dummy pronoun "there" as subject but some other verb than BE as the main verb. E.g. "There remain only two further issues to discuss"; "There seems little doubt that the fire was started deliberately."

Some verbs (and verbal idioms) in this construction are: appear, arise, arrive, develop, emerge, enter, escape, follow, grow, lie, live, loom, occur, persist, sit, spring up, sprout, stand. Many of these verbs have to do with being in a position or coming into view.

Most presentational clauses are of the bare type or have a locative extension. (But there are exceptions, e.g. "There remain only two further issues to discuss."; "There remained only two officers alive.)

There are some differences in pragmatic constraints between presentationals and existentials. One difference is that definite noun phrases occur more readily as the "displaced subject" in presentationals than in existentials.

Note: The info and examples in my post are borrowed from the 2002 reference grammar by Huddleston and Pullum et al., The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, pages 1402-3.

share|improve this answer

Constructions like this don't seem to work:

There buys many hot dogs. (not grammatical)

It seems like if you can write something in the form

subject verb there,

you can change it to

There verb subject.

For example:

Butterflies fluttered there.

There fluttered butterflies.

Sometimes we have verbs that are purely transitive, like buy, but they can still be used without an object sometimes:

I buy for Macy's. (i.e., I go around buying merchandise from wholesalers to be sold at Macy's)

It seems conceivable that you could use these in a "there" construction, but the examples I was able to come up with seemed awkward:

There bought for Macy's many style-conscious employees.

share|improve this answer
In Butterflies fluttered there. <==> There fluttered butterflies. 'there' is not the existential variety but the locational. – Edwin Ashworth Mar 24 '14 at 0:33

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.