Why is “Consequences inflicted.” not a sentence?





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







17















I was helping a friend write a paper and came across a sentence which confused me.
The sentence was something along the lines of:




Horrifying consequences inflicted upon innocent people.




As soon as I read this, I knew it was a fragment, but could not describe why. I can distill it down to:




Consequences inflicted.




and from there it seems to follow that there is a subject (the consequences) and a past-tense verb (inflicted). In my mind, it is no different from the sentence:




Icicles melted.




I am fairly sure that the latter is a complete sentence whereas the former is not, but both seem to have a past-tense verb and a plural noun. I would love if somebody could shed a little more light on the situation. Thanks in advance.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 8





    Inflicted is not serving as a verb in this sentence. It is merely an adjective. for Consequences.

    – Karlomanio
    yesterday






  • 22





    Importantly, inflict is transitive while melt is intransitive

    – James Random
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm pretty sure it is a sentence. However, only if it is just those two words. When you add "upon" you're changing the kind of word you're using with "inflicted". I can't describe this formally or I would list this as an answer. It reminds me of "The grey horse ran past the barn fell" and other garden sentences...

    – BlackVegetable
    yesterday






  • 3





    "Consequences" is the object of "inflicted", not the subject. "Inflicted" needs both a subject and an object.

    – Michael Kay
    18 hours ago


















17















I was helping a friend write a paper and came across a sentence which confused me.
The sentence was something along the lines of:




Horrifying consequences inflicted upon innocent people.




As soon as I read this, I knew it was a fragment, but could not describe why. I can distill it down to:




Consequences inflicted.




and from there it seems to follow that there is a subject (the consequences) and a past-tense verb (inflicted). In my mind, it is no different from the sentence:




Icicles melted.




I am fairly sure that the latter is a complete sentence whereas the former is not, but both seem to have a past-tense verb and a plural noun. I would love if somebody could shed a little more light on the situation. Thanks in advance.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 8





    Inflicted is not serving as a verb in this sentence. It is merely an adjective. for Consequences.

    – Karlomanio
    yesterday






  • 22





    Importantly, inflict is transitive while melt is intransitive

    – James Random
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm pretty sure it is a sentence. However, only if it is just those two words. When you add "upon" you're changing the kind of word you're using with "inflicted". I can't describe this formally or I would list this as an answer. It reminds me of "The grey horse ran past the barn fell" and other garden sentences...

    – BlackVegetable
    yesterday






  • 3





    "Consequences" is the object of "inflicted", not the subject. "Inflicted" needs both a subject and an object.

    – Michael Kay
    18 hours ago














17












17








17


1






I was helping a friend write a paper and came across a sentence which confused me.
The sentence was something along the lines of:




Horrifying consequences inflicted upon innocent people.




As soon as I read this, I knew it was a fragment, but could not describe why. I can distill it down to:




Consequences inflicted.




and from there it seems to follow that there is a subject (the consequences) and a past-tense verb (inflicted). In my mind, it is no different from the sentence:




Icicles melted.




I am fairly sure that the latter is a complete sentence whereas the former is not, but both seem to have a past-tense verb and a plural noun. I would love if somebody could shed a little more light on the situation. Thanks in advance.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












I was helping a friend write a paper and came across a sentence which confused me.
The sentence was something along the lines of:




Horrifying consequences inflicted upon innocent people.




As soon as I read this, I knew it was a fragment, but could not describe why. I can distill it down to:




Consequences inflicted.




and from there it seems to follow that there is a subject (the consequences) and a past-tense verb (inflicted). In my mind, it is no different from the sentence:




Icicles melted.




I am fairly sure that the latter is a complete sentence whereas the former is not, but both seem to have a past-tense verb and a plural noun. I would love if somebody could shed a little more light on the situation. Thanks in advance.







grammaticality verbs usage sentence-fragments






share|improve this question







New contributor




Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked yesterday









Roy FalikRoy Falik

1087




1087




New contributor




Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 8





    Inflicted is not serving as a verb in this sentence. It is merely an adjective. for Consequences.

    – Karlomanio
    yesterday






  • 22





    Importantly, inflict is transitive while melt is intransitive

    – James Random
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm pretty sure it is a sentence. However, only if it is just those two words. When you add "upon" you're changing the kind of word you're using with "inflicted". I can't describe this formally or I would list this as an answer. It reminds me of "The grey horse ran past the barn fell" and other garden sentences...

    – BlackVegetable
    yesterday






  • 3





    "Consequences" is the object of "inflicted", not the subject. "Inflicted" needs both a subject and an object.

    – Michael Kay
    18 hours ago














  • 8





    Inflicted is not serving as a verb in this sentence. It is merely an adjective. for Consequences.

    – Karlomanio
    yesterday






  • 22





    Importantly, inflict is transitive while melt is intransitive

    – James Random
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm pretty sure it is a sentence. However, only if it is just those two words. When you add "upon" you're changing the kind of word you're using with "inflicted". I can't describe this formally or I would list this as an answer. It reminds me of "The grey horse ran past the barn fell" and other garden sentences...

    – BlackVegetable
    yesterday






  • 3





    "Consequences" is the object of "inflicted", not the subject. "Inflicted" needs both a subject and an object.

    – Michael Kay
    18 hours ago








8




8





Inflicted is not serving as a verb in this sentence. It is merely an adjective. for Consequences.

– Karlomanio
yesterday





Inflicted is not serving as a verb in this sentence. It is merely an adjective. for Consequences.

– Karlomanio
yesterday




22




22





Importantly, inflict is transitive while melt is intransitive

– James Random
yesterday





Importantly, inflict is transitive while melt is intransitive

– James Random
yesterday




1




1





I'm pretty sure it is a sentence. However, only if it is just those two words. When you add "upon" you're changing the kind of word you're using with "inflicted". I can't describe this formally or I would list this as an answer. It reminds me of "The grey horse ran past the barn fell" and other garden sentences...

– BlackVegetable
yesterday





I'm pretty sure it is a sentence. However, only if it is just those two words. When you add "upon" you're changing the kind of word you're using with "inflicted". I can't describe this formally or I would list this as an answer. It reminds me of "The grey horse ran past the barn fell" and other garden sentences...

– BlackVegetable
yesterday




3




3





"Consequences" is the object of "inflicted", not the subject. "Inflicted" needs both a subject and an object.

– Michael Kay
18 hours ago





"Consequences" is the object of "inflicted", not the subject. "Inflicted" needs both a subject and an object.

– Michael Kay
18 hours ago










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes


















30














It's a fragment because there is no required auxiliary verb.



For instance:




✔ Consequences were inflicted.




This is a valid passive sentence, along the same lines as:




✔ The window was broken.




In this sentence, broken is an adjective. (In the previous sentence, inflicted is acting as an adjective.)





In another construction, inflicted can be used without an auxiliary verb, but it requires an object.




✔ They inflicted themselves on him.






In your second sentence, the intransitive verb melted doesn't require an auxiliary verb:




Icicles melted.

Cars crashed.

They jumped.




Although extremely short, those are all still sentences with a subject and a validly constructed intransitive verb.






share|improve this answer


























  • You seem to say that inflicted can be used without an auxiliary very when it has an object, which the OP's sentence does. At least to my ear, it seems like the OP's example is a complete sentence (though probably not what anyone intended to say) equivalent to "Horrifying consequences inflicted themselves upon innocent people." with the "themselves" omitted.

    – David Schwartz
    5 hours ago













  • @DavidSchwartz It can, but not in the full sentence in the question. That sentence has no subject. The example sentence in my answer has they inflicted themselves. And while the sentence in your comment is technically grammatical, it's not possible for a consequence to inflict itself upon anyone. Consequences aren't things that can take action.

    – Jason Bassford
    3 hours ago











  • Lots of things that can't take action can inflict themselves on people or things. A quick Google search revealed hundreds of examples such as "a new pestilence has now inflicted itself upon us", ".. the deep pain and grief that inflicted itself upon us", and "... a sharp cold pain inflicted itself upon me". I have no problem with the idea that consequences can take action.

    – David Schwartz
    2 hours ago





















7














It’s not considered a sentence because it contains no subject (even implicitly, like an imperative). “Consequences” is grammatically a direct object of “inflicted.”



In formal standard written English, “Consequences inflicted” would not normally be written as a complete sentence. You would be more likely to see the phrase set off by a comma, perhaps, “Consequences inflicted, the mother left her son in his room.” If you did follow it with a full stop, it would indicate a pause for effect, as in “There would be repercussions. Consequences inflicted.”



Native speakers sometimes do say things similar to that. Most of the examples that come to mind are from the military: “Countdown initiated,” “Missile launched,” “Target acquired,” etc. The copula—the "is", "was" or "has been"—is implied but unstated. It’s a minimalistic way of speaking associated with situations where every second counts. Robots in science-fiction stories tend to speak this way, too.






share|improve this answer

































    2














    After doing a little more research based on some helpful comments, I read about past participles at: https://webapps.towson.edu/ows/verbals.html




    A verbal is a word formed from a verb but functioning as a different part of speech.
    A participle is a verbal that functions as an adjective.



    Past participles, usually ending in -ed or -en, are created from the form of a verb used with the verb to be as an auxiliary verb (passive voice).



    For example: The windows were cracked by vandals.




    In the example, like in mine, there is a main verb in the past participle form ("windows cracked by vandals"); however, this is not a complete sentence without the auxiliary verb of form "to be". In my example it would be a complete sentence if I added "were" before inflicted.



    The difference between "consequences inflicted" and "icicles melted" is that inflicted is functioning as a past participle in this case.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















    • The word "cracked" can either be a past participle or a past-tense verb which may be used transitively or intransitively. Further, the preposition "by" may be used to mean "near". One could say that windows spontaneously cracked in the vicinity of vandals with the sentence "Windows cracked by vandals." That would be an awkward way of saying such a thing, but I think it would be a complete sentence with that meaning.

      – supercat
      21 hours ago



















    1














    "Inflict" is what's known as a transitive verb. A transitive verb is a verb that requires an object. Intransitive verbs don't have a subject (many verbs can be used both transitively or intransitively, but "inflicted" can only be transitive). When we write a subject and an intransitive verb, that can be complete sentence. "Melt" can function both transitively ("The sun melted the snow") or intransitively ("The snow melted"). Since "inflict" functions only transitively, "Consequences inflicted" is not a complete sentence.



    Whether a verb is transitive or intransitive is often included in dictionary entries. For instance here there's




    Definition of help (Entry 1 of 2)

    transitive verb

    1 : to give assistance or support to
    help a child with homework




    and then later on




    intransitive verb

    1 : to give assistance or support —often used with out
    helps out with the housework




    So "help" can function intransitively, hence "I helped!" is a complete sentence. On the other hand, if you look up "confuse", you will see only transitive definitions. So "It confused" would not be a complete sentence.



    Furthermore, "inflicted" is probably not the past tense of "inflict", but the past participle, in which case it is functioning as an adjective, so there isn't any verb at all. For "inflict" to be the past tense rather than past participle, "consequences" would have to be the subject, but "consequences" makes more sense as the object than the subject.






    share|improve this answer































      0














      Yes, a transitive verb always needs a direct object or the thought is incomplete and therefor not a sentence. Other examples of incomplete thoughts: John opened. The bishop slapped






      share|improve this answer
























        Your Answer








        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "97"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });






        Roy Falik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f493974%2fwhy-is-consequences-inflicted-not-a-sentence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes








        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        30














        It's a fragment because there is no required auxiliary verb.



        For instance:




        ✔ Consequences were inflicted.




        This is a valid passive sentence, along the same lines as:




        ✔ The window was broken.




        In this sentence, broken is an adjective. (In the previous sentence, inflicted is acting as an adjective.)





        In another construction, inflicted can be used without an auxiliary verb, but it requires an object.




        ✔ They inflicted themselves on him.






        In your second sentence, the intransitive verb melted doesn't require an auxiliary verb:




        Icicles melted.

        Cars crashed.

        They jumped.




        Although extremely short, those are all still sentences with a subject and a validly constructed intransitive verb.






        share|improve this answer


























        • You seem to say that inflicted can be used without an auxiliary very when it has an object, which the OP's sentence does. At least to my ear, it seems like the OP's example is a complete sentence (though probably not what anyone intended to say) equivalent to "Horrifying consequences inflicted themselves upon innocent people." with the "themselves" omitted.

          – David Schwartz
          5 hours ago













        • @DavidSchwartz It can, but not in the full sentence in the question. That sentence has no subject. The example sentence in my answer has they inflicted themselves. And while the sentence in your comment is technically grammatical, it's not possible for a consequence to inflict itself upon anyone. Consequences aren't things that can take action.

          – Jason Bassford
          3 hours ago











        • Lots of things that can't take action can inflict themselves on people or things. A quick Google search revealed hundreds of examples such as "a new pestilence has now inflicted itself upon us", ".. the deep pain and grief that inflicted itself upon us", and "... a sharp cold pain inflicted itself upon me". I have no problem with the idea that consequences can take action.

          – David Schwartz
          2 hours ago


















        30














        It's a fragment because there is no required auxiliary verb.



        For instance:




        ✔ Consequences were inflicted.




        This is a valid passive sentence, along the same lines as:




        ✔ The window was broken.




        In this sentence, broken is an adjective. (In the previous sentence, inflicted is acting as an adjective.)





        In another construction, inflicted can be used without an auxiliary verb, but it requires an object.




        ✔ They inflicted themselves on him.






        In your second sentence, the intransitive verb melted doesn't require an auxiliary verb:




        Icicles melted.

        Cars crashed.

        They jumped.




        Although extremely short, those are all still sentences with a subject and a validly constructed intransitive verb.






        share|improve this answer


























        • You seem to say that inflicted can be used without an auxiliary very when it has an object, which the OP's sentence does. At least to my ear, it seems like the OP's example is a complete sentence (though probably not what anyone intended to say) equivalent to "Horrifying consequences inflicted themselves upon innocent people." with the "themselves" omitted.

          – David Schwartz
          5 hours ago













        • @DavidSchwartz It can, but not in the full sentence in the question. That sentence has no subject. The example sentence in my answer has they inflicted themselves. And while the sentence in your comment is technically grammatical, it's not possible for a consequence to inflict itself upon anyone. Consequences aren't things that can take action.

          – Jason Bassford
          3 hours ago











        • Lots of things that can't take action can inflict themselves on people or things. A quick Google search revealed hundreds of examples such as "a new pestilence has now inflicted itself upon us", ".. the deep pain and grief that inflicted itself upon us", and "... a sharp cold pain inflicted itself upon me". I have no problem with the idea that consequences can take action.

          – David Schwartz
          2 hours ago
















        30












        30








        30







        It's a fragment because there is no required auxiliary verb.



        For instance:




        ✔ Consequences were inflicted.




        This is a valid passive sentence, along the same lines as:




        ✔ The window was broken.




        In this sentence, broken is an adjective. (In the previous sentence, inflicted is acting as an adjective.)





        In another construction, inflicted can be used without an auxiliary verb, but it requires an object.




        ✔ They inflicted themselves on him.






        In your second sentence, the intransitive verb melted doesn't require an auxiliary verb:




        Icicles melted.

        Cars crashed.

        They jumped.




        Although extremely short, those are all still sentences with a subject and a validly constructed intransitive verb.






        share|improve this answer















        It's a fragment because there is no required auxiliary verb.



        For instance:




        ✔ Consequences were inflicted.




        This is a valid passive sentence, along the same lines as:




        ✔ The window was broken.




        In this sentence, broken is an adjective. (In the previous sentence, inflicted is acting as an adjective.)





        In another construction, inflicted can be used without an auxiliary verb, but it requires an object.




        ✔ They inflicted themselves on him.






        In your second sentence, the intransitive verb melted doesn't require an auxiliary verb:




        Icicles melted.

        Cars crashed.

        They jumped.




        Although extremely short, those are all still sentences with a subject and a validly constructed intransitive verb.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited yesterday

























        answered yesterday









        Jason BassfordJason Bassford

        20.8k32750




        20.8k32750













        • You seem to say that inflicted can be used without an auxiliary very when it has an object, which the OP's sentence does. At least to my ear, it seems like the OP's example is a complete sentence (though probably not what anyone intended to say) equivalent to "Horrifying consequences inflicted themselves upon innocent people." with the "themselves" omitted.

          – David Schwartz
          5 hours ago













        • @DavidSchwartz It can, but not in the full sentence in the question. That sentence has no subject. The example sentence in my answer has they inflicted themselves. And while the sentence in your comment is technically grammatical, it's not possible for a consequence to inflict itself upon anyone. Consequences aren't things that can take action.

          – Jason Bassford
          3 hours ago











        • Lots of things that can't take action can inflict themselves on people or things. A quick Google search revealed hundreds of examples such as "a new pestilence has now inflicted itself upon us", ".. the deep pain and grief that inflicted itself upon us", and "... a sharp cold pain inflicted itself upon me". I have no problem with the idea that consequences can take action.

          – David Schwartz
          2 hours ago





















        • You seem to say that inflicted can be used without an auxiliary very when it has an object, which the OP's sentence does. At least to my ear, it seems like the OP's example is a complete sentence (though probably not what anyone intended to say) equivalent to "Horrifying consequences inflicted themselves upon innocent people." with the "themselves" omitted.

          – David Schwartz
          5 hours ago













        • @DavidSchwartz It can, but not in the full sentence in the question. That sentence has no subject. The example sentence in my answer has they inflicted themselves. And while the sentence in your comment is technically grammatical, it's not possible for a consequence to inflict itself upon anyone. Consequences aren't things that can take action.

          – Jason Bassford
          3 hours ago











        • Lots of things that can't take action can inflict themselves on people or things. A quick Google search revealed hundreds of examples such as "a new pestilence has now inflicted itself upon us", ".. the deep pain and grief that inflicted itself upon us", and "... a sharp cold pain inflicted itself upon me". I have no problem with the idea that consequences can take action.

          – David Schwartz
          2 hours ago



















        You seem to say that inflicted can be used without an auxiliary very when it has an object, which the OP's sentence does. At least to my ear, it seems like the OP's example is a complete sentence (though probably not what anyone intended to say) equivalent to "Horrifying consequences inflicted themselves upon innocent people." with the "themselves" omitted.

        – David Schwartz
        5 hours ago







        You seem to say that inflicted can be used without an auxiliary very when it has an object, which the OP's sentence does. At least to my ear, it seems like the OP's example is a complete sentence (though probably not what anyone intended to say) equivalent to "Horrifying consequences inflicted themselves upon innocent people." with the "themselves" omitted.

        – David Schwartz
        5 hours ago















        @DavidSchwartz It can, but not in the full sentence in the question. That sentence has no subject. The example sentence in my answer has they inflicted themselves. And while the sentence in your comment is technically grammatical, it's not possible for a consequence to inflict itself upon anyone. Consequences aren't things that can take action.

        – Jason Bassford
        3 hours ago





        @DavidSchwartz It can, but not in the full sentence in the question. That sentence has no subject. The example sentence in my answer has they inflicted themselves. And while the sentence in your comment is technically grammatical, it's not possible for a consequence to inflict itself upon anyone. Consequences aren't things that can take action.

        – Jason Bassford
        3 hours ago













        Lots of things that can't take action can inflict themselves on people or things. A quick Google search revealed hundreds of examples such as "a new pestilence has now inflicted itself upon us", ".. the deep pain and grief that inflicted itself upon us", and "... a sharp cold pain inflicted itself upon me". I have no problem with the idea that consequences can take action.

        – David Schwartz
        2 hours ago







        Lots of things that can't take action can inflict themselves on people or things. A quick Google search revealed hundreds of examples such as "a new pestilence has now inflicted itself upon us", ".. the deep pain and grief that inflicted itself upon us", and "... a sharp cold pain inflicted itself upon me". I have no problem with the idea that consequences can take action.

        – David Schwartz
        2 hours ago















        7














        It’s not considered a sentence because it contains no subject (even implicitly, like an imperative). “Consequences” is grammatically a direct object of “inflicted.”



        In formal standard written English, “Consequences inflicted” would not normally be written as a complete sentence. You would be more likely to see the phrase set off by a comma, perhaps, “Consequences inflicted, the mother left her son in his room.” If you did follow it with a full stop, it would indicate a pause for effect, as in “There would be repercussions. Consequences inflicted.”



        Native speakers sometimes do say things similar to that. Most of the examples that come to mind are from the military: “Countdown initiated,” “Missile launched,” “Target acquired,” etc. The copula—the "is", "was" or "has been"—is implied but unstated. It’s a minimalistic way of speaking associated with situations where every second counts. Robots in science-fiction stories tend to speak this way, too.






        share|improve this answer






























          7














          It’s not considered a sentence because it contains no subject (even implicitly, like an imperative). “Consequences” is grammatically a direct object of “inflicted.”



          In formal standard written English, “Consequences inflicted” would not normally be written as a complete sentence. You would be more likely to see the phrase set off by a comma, perhaps, “Consequences inflicted, the mother left her son in his room.” If you did follow it with a full stop, it would indicate a pause for effect, as in “There would be repercussions. Consequences inflicted.”



          Native speakers sometimes do say things similar to that. Most of the examples that come to mind are from the military: “Countdown initiated,” “Missile launched,” “Target acquired,” etc. The copula—the "is", "was" or "has been"—is implied but unstated. It’s a minimalistic way of speaking associated with situations where every second counts. Robots in science-fiction stories tend to speak this way, too.






          share|improve this answer




























            7












            7








            7







            It’s not considered a sentence because it contains no subject (even implicitly, like an imperative). “Consequences” is grammatically a direct object of “inflicted.”



            In formal standard written English, “Consequences inflicted” would not normally be written as a complete sentence. You would be more likely to see the phrase set off by a comma, perhaps, “Consequences inflicted, the mother left her son in his room.” If you did follow it with a full stop, it would indicate a pause for effect, as in “There would be repercussions. Consequences inflicted.”



            Native speakers sometimes do say things similar to that. Most of the examples that come to mind are from the military: “Countdown initiated,” “Missile launched,” “Target acquired,” etc. The copula—the "is", "was" or "has been"—is implied but unstated. It’s a minimalistic way of speaking associated with situations where every second counts. Robots in science-fiction stories tend to speak this way, too.






            share|improve this answer















            It’s not considered a sentence because it contains no subject (even implicitly, like an imperative). “Consequences” is grammatically a direct object of “inflicted.”



            In formal standard written English, “Consequences inflicted” would not normally be written as a complete sentence. You would be more likely to see the phrase set off by a comma, perhaps, “Consequences inflicted, the mother left her son in his room.” If you did follow it with a full stop, it would indicate a pause for effect, as in “There would be repercussions. Consequences inflicted.”



            Native speakers sometimes do say things similar to that. Most of the examples that come to mind are from the military: “Countdown initiated,” “Missile launched,” “Target acquired,” etc. The copula—the "is", "was" or "has been"—is implied but unstated. It’s a minimalistic way of speaking associated with situations where every second counts. Robots in science-fiction stories tend to speak this way, too.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 12 hours ago









            Sandra

            31




            31










            answered yesterday









            DavislorDavislor

            2,267216




            2,267216























                2














                After doing a little more research based on some helpful comments, I read about past participles at: https://webapps.towson.edu/ows/verbals.html




                A verbal is a word formed from a verb but functioning as a different part of speech.
                A participle is a verbal that functions as an adjective.



                Past participles, usually ending in -ed or -en, are created from the form of a verb used with the verb to be as an auxiliary verb (passive voice).



                For example: The windows were cracked by vandals.




                In the example, like in mine, there is a main verb in the past participle form ("windows cracked by vandals"); however, this is not a complete sentence without the auxiliary verb of form "to be". In my example it would be a complete sentence if I added "were" before inflicted.



                The difference between "consequences inflicted" and "icicles melted" is that inflicted is functioning as a past participle in this case.






                share|improve this answer








                New contributor




                Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                • The word "cracked" can either be a past participle or a past-tense verb which may be used transitively or intransitively. Further, the preposition "by" may be used to mean "near". One could say that windows spontaneously cracked in the vicinity of vandals with the sentence "Windows cracked by vandals." That would be an awkward way of saying such a thing, but I think it would be a complete sentence with that meaning.

                  – supercat
                  21 hours ago
















                2














                After doing a little more research based on some helpful comments, I read about past participles at: https://webapps.towson.edu/ows/verbals.html




                A verbal is a word formed from a verb but functioning as a different part of speech.
                A participle is a verbal that functions as an adjective.



                Past participles, usually ending in -ed or -en, are created from the form of a verb used with the verb to be as an auxiliary verb (passive voice).



                For example: The windows were cracked by vandals.




                In the example, like in mine, there is a main verb in the past participle form ("windows cracked by vandals"); however, this is not a complete sentence without the auxiliary verb of form "to be". In my example it would be a complete sentence if I added "were" before inflicted.



                The difference between "consequences inflicted" and "icicles melted" is that inflicted is functioning as a past participle in this case.






                share|improve this answer








                New contributor




                Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                • The word "cracked" can either be a past participle or a past-tense verb which may be used transitively or intransitively. Further, the preposition "by" may be used to mean "near". One could say that windows spontaneously cracked in the vicinity of vandals with the sentence "Windows cracked by vandals." That would be an awkward way of saying such a thing, but I think it would be a complete sentence with that meaning.

                  – supercat
                  21 hours ago














                2












                2








                2







                After doing a little more research based on some helpful comments, I read about past participles at: https://webapps.towson.edu/ows/verbals.html




                A verbal is a word formed from a verb but functioning as a different part of speech.
                A participle is a verbal that functions as an adjective.



                Past participles, usually ending in -ed or -en, are created from the form of a verb used with the verb to be as an auxiliary verb (passive voice).



                For example: The windows were cracked by vandals.




                In the example, like in mine, there is a main verb in the past participle form ("windows cracked by vandals"); however, this is not a complete sentence without the auxiliary verb of form "to be". In my example it would be a complete sentence if I added "were" before inflicted.



                The difference between "consequences inflicted" and "icicles melted" is that inflicted is functioning as a past participle in this case.






                share|improve this answer








                New contributor




                Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.










                After doing a little more research based on some helpful comments, I read about past participles at: https://webapps.towson.edu/ows/verbals.html




                A verbal is a word formed from a verb but functioning as a different part of speech.
                A participle is a verbal that functions as an adjective.



                Past participles, usually ending in -ed or -en, are created from the form of a verb used with the verb to be as an auxiliary verb (passive voice).



                For example: The windows were cracked by vandals.




                In the example, like in mine, there is a main verb in the past participle form ("windows cracked by vandals"); however, this is not a complete sentence without the auxiliary verb of form "to be". In my example it would be a complete sentence if I added "were" before inflicted.



                The difference between "consequences inflicted" and "icicles melted" is that inflicted is functioning as a past participle in this case.







                share|improve this answer








                New contributor




                Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.









                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer






                New contributor




                Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.









                answered yesterday









                Roy FalikRoy Falik

                1087




                1087




                New contributor




                Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.





                New contributor





                Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.






                Roy Falik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.













                • The word "cracked" can either be a past participle or a past-tense verb which may be used transitively or intransitively. Further, the preposition "by" may be used to mean "near". One could say that windows spontaneously cracked in the vicinity of vandals with the sentence "Windows cracked by vandals." That would be an awkward way of saying such a thing, but I think it would be a complete sentence with that meaning.

                  – supercat
                  21 hours ago



















                • The word "cracked" can either be a past participle or a past-tense verb which may be used transitively or intransitively. Further, the preposition "by" may be used to mean "near". One could say that windows spontaneously cracked in the vicinity of vandals with the sentence "Windows cracked by vandals." That would be an awkward way of saying such a thing, but I think it would be a complete sentence with that meaning.

                  – supercat
                  21 hours ago

















                The word "cracked" can either be a past participle or a past-tense verb which may be used transitively or intransitively. Further, the preposition "by" may be used to mean "near". One could say that windows spontaneously cracked in the vicinity of vandals with the sentence "Windows cracked by vandals." That would be an awkward way of saying such a thing, but I think it would be a complete sentence with that meaning.

                – supercat
                21 hours ago





                The word "cracked" can either be a past participle or a past-tense verb which may be used transitively or intransitively. Further, the preposition "by" may be used to mean "near". One could say that windows spontaneously cracked in the vicinity of vandals with the sentence "Windows cracked by vandals." That would be an awkward way of saying such a thing, but I think it would be a complete sentence with that meaning.

                – supercat
                21 hours ago











                1














                "Inflict" is what's known as a transitive verb. A transitive verb is a verb that requires an object. Intransitive verbs don't have a subject (many verbs can be used both transitively or intransitively, but "inflicted" can only be transitive). When we write a subject and an intransitive verb, that can be complete sentence. "Melt" can function both transitively ("The sun melted the snow") or intransitively ("The snow melted"). Since "inflict" functions only transitively, "Consequences inflicted" is not a complete sentence.



                Whether a verb is transitive or intransitive is often included in dictionary entries. For instance here there's




                Definition of help (Entry 1 of 2)

                transitive verb

                1 : to give assistance or support to
                help a child with homework




                and then later on




                intransitive verb

                1 : to give assistance or support —often used with out
                helps out with the housework




                So "help" can function intransitively, hence "I helped!" is a complete sentence. On the other hand, if you look up "confuse", you will see only transitive definitions. So "It confused" would not be a complete sentence.



                Furthermore, "inflicted" is probably not the past tense of "inflict", but the past participle, in which case it is functioning as an adjective, so there isn't any verb at all. For "inflict" to be the past tense rather than past participle, "consequences" would have to be the subject, but "consequences" makes more sense as the object than the subject.






                share|improve this answer




























                  1














                  "Inflict" is what's known as a transitive verb. A transitive verb is a verb that requires an object. Intransitive verbs don't have a subject (many verbs can be used both transitively or intransitively, but "inflicted" can only be transitive). When we write a subject and an intransitive verb, that can be complete sentence. "Melt" can function both transitively ("The sun melted the snow") or intransitively ("The snow melted"). Since "inflict" functions only transitively, "Consequences inflicted" is not a complete sentence.



                  Whether a verb is transitive or intransitive is often included in dictionary entries. For instance here there's




                  Definition of help (Entry 1 of 2)

                  transitive verb

                  1 : to give assistance or support to
                  help a child with homework




                  and then later on




                  intransitive verb

                  1 : to give assistance or support —often used with out
                  helps out with the housework




                  So "help" can function intransitively, hence "I helped!" is a complete sentence. On the other hand, if you look up "confuse", you will see only transitive definitions. So "It confused" would not be a complete sentence.



                  Furthermore, "inflicted" is probably not the past tense of "inflict", but the past participle, in which case it is functioning as an adjective, so there isn't any verb at all. For "inflict" to be the past tense rather than past participle, "consequences" would have to be the subject, but "consequences" makes more sense as the object than the subject.






                  share|improve this answer


























                    1












                    1








                    1







                    "Inflict" is what's known as a transitive verb. A transitive verb is a verb that requires an object. Intransitive verbs don't have a subject (many verbs can be used both transitively or intransitively, but "inflicted" can only be transitive). When we write a subject and an intransitive verb, that can be complete sentence. "Melt" can function both transitively ("The sun melted the snow") or intransitively ("The snow melted"). Since "inflict" functions only transitively, "Consequences inflicted" is not a complete sentence.



                    Whether a verb is transitive or intransitive is often included in dictionary entries. For instance here there's




                    Definition of help (Entry 1 of 2)

                    transitive verb

                    1 : to give assistance or support to
                    help a child with homework




                    and then later on




                    intransitive verb

                    1 : to give assistance or support —often used with out
                    helps out with the housework




                    So "help" can function intransitively, hence "I helped!" is a complete sentence. On the other hand, if you look up "confuse", you will see only transitive definitions. So "It confused" would not be a complete sentence.



                    Furthermore, "inflicted" is probably not the past tense of "inflict", but the past participle, in which case it is functioning as an adjective, so there isn't any verb at all. For "inflict" to be the past tense rather than past participle, "consequences" would have to be the subject, but "consequences" makes more sense as the object than the subject.






                    share|improve this answer













                    "Inflict" is what's known as a transitive verb. A transitive verb is a verb that requires an object. Intransitive verbs don't have a subject (many verbs can be used both transitively or intransitively, but "inflicted" can only be transitive). When we write a subject and an intransitive verb, that can be complete sentence. "Melt" can function both transitively ("The sun melted the snow") or intransitively ("The snow melted"). Since "inflict" functions only transitively, "Consequences inflicted" is not a complete sentence.



                    Whether a verb is transitive or intransitive is often included in dictionary entries. For instance here there's




                    Definition of help (Entry 1 of 2)

                    transitive verb

                    1 : to give assistance or support to
                    help a child with homework




                    and then later on




                    intransitive verb

                    1 : to give assistance or support —often used with out
                    helps out with the housework




                    So "help" can function intransitively, hence "I helped!" is a complete sentence. On the other hand, if you look up "confuse", you will see only transitive definitions. So "It confused" would not be a complete sentence.



                    Furthermore, "inflicted" is probably not the past tense of "inflict", but the past participle, in which case it is functioning as an adjective, so there isn't any verb at all. For "inflict" to be the past tense rather than past participle, "consequences" would have to be the subject, but "consequences" makes more sense as the object than the subject.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered 10 hours ago









                    AcccumulationAcccumulation

                    1,49529




                    1,49529























                        0














                        Yes, a transitive verb always needs a direct object or the thought is incomplete and therefor not a sentence. Other examples of incomplete thoughts: John opened. The bishop slapped






                        share|improve this answer




























                          0














                          Yes, a transitive verb always needs a direct object or the thought is incomplete and therefor not a sentence. Other examples of incomplete thoughts: John opened. The bishop slapped






                          share|improve this answer


























                            0












                            0








                            0







                            Yes, a transitive verb always needs a direct object or the thought is incomplete and therefor not a sentence. Other examples of incomplete thoughts: John opened. The bishop slapped






                            share|improve this answer













                            Yes, a transitive verb always needs a direct object or the thought is incomplete and therefor not a sentence. Other examples of incomplete thoughts: John opened. The bishop slapped







                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered 4 hours ago









                            Aled CymroAled Cymro

                            30715




                            30715






















                                Roy Falik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                                draft saved

                                draft discarded


















                                Roy Falik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                                Roy Falik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                                Roy Falik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                                Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f493974%2fwhy-is-consequences-inflicted-not-a-sentence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                數位音樂下載

                                格利澤436b

                                When can things happen in Etherscan, such as the picture below?