Handbook of the History of Logic: - Fordham University Faculty

The Development of Supposition Theory in the Later 12 th through 14 th Centuries 175
Medieval logicians held that the use of an intransitive verb is equivalent to the
use of the copula along with its present participle. For example, they said that
‘Brownie runs’ is equivalent to ‘Brownie is running’. This is not the progressive
form of the verb ‘run’, as it is in English; rather it is the copula followed by the
participle ‘running’, used adjectivally. It is not clear that this is normal Latin,
but it is what they insisted on, and I will go along with this. As a result, if you
want to treat a sentence with an intransitive verb, you can take its form to be
that of the copula followed by the verb’s present participle. 23 Further, in Latin
present participles used with ‘is’ are adjectives. So in Latin, ‘Brownie is running’
has the same grammatical analysis as ‘Brownie is grey’; it’s a subject followed by
the copula followed by an adjective. And we saw above how ordinary adjectives
used with the copula are equivalent to common nouns used with the copula. So
we again have a procedure for applying the logical theory to a new class of items.
Intransitive verbs are equivalent to a combination of the copula with a participle,
24 which is equivalent to a combination of the copula with an adjective, which
is equivalent to a combination of the copula with a substantivated adjective, which
is equivalent to a combination of the copula with a common noun. The theory
thus needs no emendation.
When the copula ‘is’ is used with only one term, as in ‘A manis’, it is usually
analyzed as an intransitive verb, so that ‘A manis’ is equivalent to ‘A manis
[a] being’. 25 The word ‘being’ here signifies everything that there is; in a present
tense non-modal proposition it supposits for every presently existing thing.
23 Paul of Venice LP I.6. “A categorical proposition is one which has a subject, a predicate
and a copula as its principle parts, e.g., ‘a man is an animal’, ’man’ is the subject; ‘animal’ is
the predicate, and the copula is always that verb ‘is’ because it conjoins the subject with the
predicate. And if someone says ‘a man runs’ (homo currit) is a categorical proposition but it
does not have a predicate, it can be replied that it has an implicit predicate, viz., ’running’. This
is clear by analyzing that verb ‘runs’ into ‘I am’, ‘you are’, ‘it is’ and its participle.”
24 Buridan 1.3.2 “The third section expounds the above description of categorical proposition,
illustrating it by the proposition: ‘A man runs’, in which the name ‘man’ is the subject, and the
verb ‘runs’ is the predicate. Concerning this point we should note, as [Peter of Spain] immediately
remarks, that the verb is not the predicate, strictly speaking, but it is either the copula joining
the predicate to the subject or implies in itself the copula and the predicate together. For the
verb ‘is’ as the third adjacent [tertium adiacens] is the copula, and what follows is the predicate.”
[The verb is “third adjacent” when it is a third expression combining with two others.] See
the continuation of this quote in the next note.
25 The previous quote continues: “But the verb ‘is’ occurs as second adjacent [secundum adiacens],
when I say ‘A man is’; but then, like any other verb, it implies in itself the copula with the
predicate or with the principal part of the predicate; therefore, to make the subject, predicate
and copula explicit, such a verb has to be analyzed into the verb ‘is’ as third adjacent, provided
that the proposition is assertoric and in the present tense, and into the participle of that verb,
as for example, ‘A man runs’ is to be analyzed into ‘A man is running’, and similarly, ‘A man
is’ into ‘A man is a being’.”
[The verb is “second adjacent” when it is a second expression combining with one other.]
The noun ‘being’ must be understood to be a logically special common term, which signifies
everything.