Editing Grammatical conjugation (section)

==Verbal agreement==
'''Verbal agreement''', or '''concord''', is a [[morphology (linguistics)|morpho]]-[[syntax|syntactic]] construct in which properties of the [[subject (grammar)|subject]] and/or [[object (grammar)|object]]s of a [[verb]] are indicated by the verb form.  Verbs are then said to [[agreement (linguistics)|agree]] with their subjects (resp. objects).

Many [[English language|English]] verbs exhibit subject agreement of the following sort: whereas ''I go'', ''you go'', ''we go'', ''they go'' are all grammatical in standard English, ''he go'' is not (except in the [[subjunctive]], as "They requested that ''he go'' with them").  Instead, a special form of the verb ''to go'' has to be used to produce ''he goes''.  On the other hand ''I goes'', ''you goes'' etc. are not grammatical in standard English.  (Things are different in some English dialects that lack agreement.)  A few English verbs have no special forms that indicate subject agreement (''I may'', ''you may'', ''he may''), and the verb ''to be'' has an additional form ''am'' that can only be used with the pronoun ''I'' as the subject.

Verbs in written [[French verbs|French]] exhibit more intensive agreement [[morphology (linguistics)|morphology]] than English verbs: {{lang|fr|je suis}} (I am), {{lang|fr|tu es}} ("you are", singular [[T–V distinction|informal]]), {{lang|fr|elle est}} (she is), {{lang|fr|nous sommes}} (we are), {{lang|fr|vous êtes}} ("you are", plural), {{lang|fr|ils sont}} (they are).  Historically, English used to have a similar verbal paradigm. Some historic verb forms are used by [[William Shakespeare|Shakespeare]] as slightly archaic or more formal variants (''I do'', ''thou dost'', ''he doth'') of the modern forms.

Some languages with verbal agreement can leave certain subjects [[null-subject language|implicit]] when the subject is fully determined by the verb form. In [[Spanish language|Spanish]], for instance, subject pronouns do not need to be explicitly present, but in French, its close relative, they are obligatory. The Spanish equivalent to the French {{lang|fr|je suis}} (I am) can be simply {{lang|es|soy}} (lit. "am").  The pronoun {{lang|es|yo}} (I) in the explicit form {{lang|es|yo soy}} is used only for emphasis or to clear ambiguity in complex texts.

Some languages have a richer agreement system in which verbs agree also with some or all of their objects. [[Ubykh language|Ubykh]] exhibits verbal agreement for the subject, direct object, indirect object, benefaction and ablative objects ({{lang|uby|a.w3.s.xe.n.t'u.n}}, ''you gave it to him for me'').

[[Basque language|Basque]] can show agreement not only for subject, direct object and indirect object but it also can exhibit agreement for the listener as the implicit benefactor: {{lang|eu|autoa ekarri digute}} means "they brought us the car" (neuter agreement for the listener), but {{lang|eu|autoa ekarri ziguten}} means "they brought us the car" (agreement for feminine singular listener).

Languages with a rich agreement morphology facilitate relatively free word order without leading to increased ambiguity. The canonical word order in Basque is [[subject–object–verb]], but all permutations of subject, verb and object are permitted.

===Nonverbal person agreement===
In some languages,<ref>Stassen, Leon; '''Intransitive Predication (Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory)'''; published 1997 by [[Oxford University Press]]; p. 39. {{ISBN|0-19-925893-7}}</ref> predicative [[adjective]]s and [[copula (linguistics)|copular]] complements receive a form of person agreement that is distinct from that used on ordinary [[predicative verb]]s. Although that is a form of conjugation in that it refers back to the person of the subject, it is not "verbal" because it always derives from [[pronouns]] that have become [[clitic]] to the nouns to which they refer.<ref>Stassen; '''Intransitive Predication'''; pp. 77 & 284-288</ref> An example of nonverbal person agreement, along with contrasting verbal conjugation, can be found from [[Beja language|Beja]]<ref name="Stassen40">Stassen, '''Intransitive Predication'''; p. 40</ref> (person agreement affixes in bold):

* {{lang|bej-latn|wun.tu.'''wi'''}}, “you (fem.) are big”
* {{lang|bej-latn|hadá.b.'''wa'''}}, “you (masc.) are a sheik”
* {{lang|bej-latn|'''e'''.n.fór}}, “he flees”

Another example can be found from [[Ket language|Ket]]:<ref name="Stassen40"/>

* {{lang|ket-latn|fèmba.'''di'''}}, “I am a [[Tungusic peoples|Tungus]]”
* {{lang|ket-latn|'''dɨ'''.fen}}, “I am standing”

In [[Turkic languages|Turkic]], and a few [[Uralic languages|Uralic]] and [[indigenous Australian languages|Australian Aboriginal languages]], predicative adjectives and copular complements take affixes that are identical to those used on predicative verbs, but their [[negation (linguistics)|negation]] is different. For example, in [[Turkish language|Turkish]]:

* {{lang|tr|koş.u.yor.'''sun'''}} “you are running”
* {{lang|tr|çavuş.'''sun'''}} “you are a sergeant”

Under negation, that becomes (negative affixes in bold):

* {{lang|tr|koş.'''mu'''.yor.sun}} “you are not running”
* {{lang|tr|çavuş '''değil'''.sin}} “you are not a sergeant”

Therefore, the person agreement affixes used with predicative adjectives and nominals in Turkic languages are considered to be nonverbal in character. In some analyses, they are viewed as a form of verbal takeover by a copular strategy.