In standard English, for example, you can say I am or it is, but not “I am” or “it is.” This is because the grammar of the language requires that the verb and its subject coincide personally. The pronouns I and him are respectively the first and third person, just as the verbs are and are. The verbage form must be chosen in such a way as to have the same person as the subject, unlike the fictitious agreement based on meaning.   In American English, for example, the expression of the United Nations is treated as singular for the purposes of concordance, although it is formally plural. Another type of flexible morphology is the concordance on verbs. If you have learned French or Spanish or Italian, you know that the suffix changes at the end of a verb depending on who is the subject of the verb. That is a difference of agreement. Here are some examples of French. You can see that there is a different morphem at the end of each verb, depending on who makes the song. The chord is a phenomenon in the natural language, in which the form of a word or morphems covariate with the form of another word or sentence in the sentence. For example, in the English phrase John goes Fido every morning, the shape of the “walks” is conditioned by the characteristics of the theme, “John”.
This can be replaced by “John” by an element with different relevant characteristics, as in We go fido every morning, leading to a change in the form of “walks” to “walks” (or, alternatively, a change from “-s” to an empty morpheme, . The agreement is perhaps the morphosytic phenomenon that arises, because it is the morphological expression of a relationship that most researchers consider a syntactic relationship (although not without dissent; see morphological approaches). In contemporary linguistics, the term agreement is (unfortunately) used to refer alternately to the phenomenon itself and to the hypothetical grammatical mechanism that results. Unless otherwise stated, the term is used here only in the neutral and descriptive theoretical sense. Another point of terminology variability concerns the identity of the grammatical elements that conclude an agreement. Canonically, the term is used to describe the morphological covariance between certain verbal elements in a clause (typically carrying the Tense/Aspect/Morphology) and a nominal argument in the same clause; but the term has also been used to describe many other matings of kovarying elements (for example. B nominates and its adjective modifiers, nouns and their owners, pre/post positions and their supplements, etc.; and more recently, the effects of the tension sequence, pronouns and their precursors, and even the relationship between several negative elements in a single clause; see the re-enrollment agreement as another explanation). Agreements are widespread in all linguistic areas; At the same time, the languages of the world can vary considerably in the amount of concordance morphology they present. At one end of the scale, a language like Mandarin has no canonical arrangement to be talked about; While languages such as Abkhazia, Basque, Icelandic and other robust forms of concordance between verbs and their arguments, their nouns and their modifiers, etc. Changers, Steven and Larisa Zlatié. 2003.
The many faces of the agreement. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information. However, almost all regular verbs have not been used in the past. So the auxiliary verb is used, z.B. you helped, not you helped. Case agreement is not an essential feature of English (only personal pronouns and pronouns with a case mark). The agreement between these pronouns can sometimes be observed: activation pattern for the strain, the shape of the past (pt) and the current/agreeing conditions (pta) (main and… The agreement generally includes the matching of the value of a grammatical category between different elements of a sentence (or sometimes between sentences, as in some cases where a pronoun agrees with its predecessor or its reference opinion).