2. The Category of Person and Number of the English and Ukrainian Verb

The finite verb in the contrasted languages has six common morphological categories which are realised partly with the help of synthetic means (inflexions) and partly through different analytical means. Thus, the categories of person and number are realised in both contrasted languages synthetically.

The categories of person and number are closely connected with each other. Their immediate connection is conditioned by the two factors: firstly, by their situational meaning, referring the process denoted by the verb to the subject in the situation; secondly, by their direct and immediate rela­tion to the syntactic unit expressing the subject as the functional part of the sentence. Both categories are different in principle from the other categories of the finite verb, in so far as they do not convey any inherently “verbal” semantics.

The expression of the category of person is essentially confined to the singular form of the verb in the present tense of the Indicative Mood and, in addition, it is very singularly presented in the future tense. As for the past tense, the person is alien to it except for a trace of person distinction in the archaic conjugation.

In the present tense the expression of the category of person is divided into three peculiar subsystems:

1. The first subsystem includes the modal verbs that have no personal inflec­tions: can, may, must, shall, will, ought, need, dare. So, in the formal sense, the category of person is wholly neutralized with these verbs.

2. The second subsystem is made up by the unique verbal lexeme be: the verb be has three different suppletive personal forms (am for the first person singular, is for the third person singular, and are for plural forms).

3. The third subsystem presents just the regular, normal expression of person. The mark is confined here to the third person singular -(e)s, the other two per­sons (the first and the second) remaining unmarked, e.g. comes – come, etc.

In the future tense, the person finds quite another mode of expression. It marks not the third, but the first person in distinction to the remaining two and it also includes in its sphere the plural. The very principle of the person featuring is not in morphemic inflection (as it is the case with the present), but in the positional use of shall – will specifically marking the first person.

Passing on to the expression of grammatical number by the English finite verb, we are faced with the interesting fact that it is hardly featured at all from the formally morphemic point of view. The more or less dis­tinct morphemic featuring of the category of number can be seen only with the archaic forms of the unique be, both in the present tense and in the past tense. As for the rest of the verbs, the blending of the morphemic expression of the categories of person and number is complete, for the only explicit morphemic opposition in the integral categorical sphere of person and number is reduced with these verbs to the third person singular (the present tense of the Indicative Mood) being contrasted against the unmarked finite form of the verb.

As soon as we take into consideration the functional side of the ana­lysed forms, we discover at once that these forms exist in unity with the person-numerical forms of the subject. This unity is of such a nature that the universal and true indicator of person and number of the subject of the verb will be the subject itself. The combination of the English finite verb with the subject is obligatory not only in the general syntactic sense, but also in the categorical sense of expressing the subject-person of the process.