Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 1996. Vol. 1. Eger Journal of English Studies.(Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 24)

Éva Kovács: Complements vs. adjuncts in valency grammar

which undergoes the action and the third the indirect object, to whose benefit the action takes place. As regards the possible distribution of actants Tesniere is inconsistent. At one point Tesniere (1959:108) suggests that the order number of an actant can never be higher than the valency number of the verb, later he states certain valencies may remain unused or free (1959:239). Unlike actants, the number of circumstantials for any verb is indefinite. He also notes that the third actant has certain of the characteristics of a cirumstantial and certain circumstantials are in some way analogous with actants. In spite of the inconsistences, Tesniere's work clearly laid the foundations of Valency theory. As far as the German Grammarians are concerned, Helbig and Schenkel are regarded as central figures in the Valency theory. In their "Wörterbuch zur Valenz und Distribution deutscher Verben", which first appeared in 1968, they present their own views of the theory. The first of which is the consideration of the verb as the structural centre of the sentence. The second important issue they discuss is the distinction between complements/actants (Ergänzung) and adjuncts (Freie Angabe) and the further subdivision of complements into obligatory and optional. They give a general definition of "valency boundness "(1973:33), based on the distinction between complements/actants and adjuncts: "Both obligatory as well as optional actants (both are necessary elements) are bound by Valency to the verb, are anchored in the syntactic frame of the verb and thus their number and type can be fixed. The adjuncts on the other hand (as unnnecessary elements) are not bound to the verb, are unlimited in number and can for this reason be left out of or added to almost any sentence at will." The theoretical section of Helbig-Schenkel's dictionary is also concerned with explaining their own formalism for the dictionary entries. Each entry consists of three levels: the first gives the numerical valence of the verb, distinguishing obligatory and optional elements. The second level gives the syntactic form of the valency117