Objective Complements
Date: 2015-10-07; view: 478.
(Objects)
§ 443. Objective complements (objects) may be defined as noun (or noun-equivalent) adjuncts of objective verbs, denoting the object of the action or its subject (the by-phrase). Our definition does not differ essentially from that given by A. I. Smirnitsky: «Äîïîëíåíèå — ýòî âòîðîñòåïåííûé ÷ëåí ïðåäëîæåíèÿ, îáîçíà÷àþùèé ïðåäìåò, ó÷àñòâóþùèé â ïðîöåññå, ïðè÷åì ýòî îáîçíà÷åíèå íå ñâÿçûâàåòñÿ ñ âûðàæåíèåì ïðåäèêàöèè».
From the definition given it is clear that the object is not bound with any definite part of the sentence, it is attached to the verb.
In the following examples objective complements are associated with different parts of the sentence.
Writing letters for the homesick patients was her self-imposed duty. (Randall).
The object is attached to the subject.
He carried out experiments in surgery. (Daily Worker). It is connected with the predicate.
Adrian was filled not with futile rebellion. (Galsworthy).
The object is connected with the predicative complement.
There was no time to see h e r. (Jerome). Her is an objective complement connected with the attribute.
§ 444. In English, objects are primarily divided into prepositional and prepositionless.The latter are, according to their meaning and position in the sentence, further divided into direct and indirectobjects.
The direct object denotes something (or somebody) directly affected by the action of the verb. The indirect object usually denotes the person for whose benefit the action is performed or towards whom it is directed: He sent me (indirect) a letter (direct).
The indirect object usually precedes the direct object and cannot be used without it. In He sent me "me" would be understood as a direct object.
The prepositional object with to (the so-called to-phrase) and for (the for-phrase) are often grammatical synonyms of the indirect object. Accordingly, the sentence I offered the student my book can be transformed into I offered my book to the student, I bought him a toy into I bought a toy for him. The direct object is used with a much greater number of verbs than the indirect object, has practically no structural synonyms, and is often so closely connected with the verb that the meaning of the latter is vague without its object. The sentence I made, for instance, is not clear unless the objective complement a shelf or tea or a report is added.
§ 445. Sometimes a verb may take two direct objects, e. g. They asked him questions. Though this sentence is structurally similar to They gave him books the functions of him in the two sentences are different. In the first sentence it can be used without the second object (Don't ask him), in the second it cannot. The same in the corresponding passive constructions: He was asked but not He was given. So in the first sentence him is a direct object, in the second — an indirect one.
§ 446. Besides the direct and indirect objects linguists distinguish the so-called cognate object. In the sentences She slept a sound sleep. We live a happy life the verbs to sleep and to live, usually subjective, seem to take direct objects. But these objects are of peculiar nature: they do not denote anything that is outside the action and affected by it, as is the case with most objects. The nouns sleep anf life are cognate with the verbs to sleep and to live, i. e. they are of common origin and kindred meaning. They modify the verb rather as adverbials than as objects. Cf.: She slept a sound sleep. = She slept soundly. We live a happy life. = We life happily.
Here is one of the links between objective and adverbial complements. Another link is a case like They passed a mile in silence where a mile may be taken for a direct object to the transitive verb to pass, or, in accordance with the meaning of the noun mile, for an adverbial complement of place. Cf. They walked a mile. He passed five years in the Far North.
§ 447. Objective complements, as defined, may be nouns or noun-equivalents. Among the latter we may count the gerund, and the infinitive, alone or together with their subject-words (i. e. the whole complex).
A. I. Smirnitsky is of the opinion that, unlike the gerund, the infinitive cannot function as an objective complement. The arguments are as follows.
a) Since it is never preceded by a preposition, it cannot be a prepositional object, and prepositionless objects exist only as contrasted with prepositional ones.
b) The infinitive is sometimes used in positions where no noun objects are used, e. g. I am glad to) see you.
c) In sentences like I want to go there the infinitive does not denote the object of the action of wanting (as in the case of I want a book). It rather unfolds the content of that action.
There is no denying the fact that the infinitive differs from the noun in many respects, including the features mentioned by A. I. Smirnitsky, but we do not think this prevents the infinitive from being an object when it is the complement of an objective verb. The infinitive is not preceded by prepositions and has the verbal meaning of 'action' when discharging other functions in common with nouns. Cf. a book to read and a book for Sunday, he came for a book and he came to study. But A. I. Smirnitsky does not deny the infinitive the functions of an attribute or an adverbial on the same grounds. Moreover, he reminds his readers that the infinitive is nominal by origin, and the particle to is a preposition by origin, and that accounts for the fact that the infinitive as an attribute is placed in the same position as a noun with a preposition.
In a sentence like His intention was to write a book the very possibility of connecting the noun intention and the infinitive to write with the help of the link-verb to be proves the nominal character of the infinitive. The same in the sentence To write a book was his à ò b i t i î ï. Similarly in the sentence His intention to write a book was not realized, where to write is a kind of apposition to the noun intention.
We think that the nominal nature of the infinitive, sufficiently well preserved to allow its being used as a subject, an attribute, a predicative and an adverbial complement, suffices to make it an objective complement in cases like I promised him to come (cf. I promised him a fair hearing). I forgot to shave (cf. I forgot the key), etc.
§ 448. Like other parts of a simple sentence (clause), objective complements may be expressed by complexes and are then called complex objects.
Analysing the sentence I hate you to go away, B. A. Ilyish shows1 that the object of the verb hate is not you (which would change the meaning of the sentence) but the whole infinitival complex you to go away.
Traditionally such complexes have been called 'The Accusative with the Infinitive', but some authors2 object to this term on the ground that there is no accusative case in Modern English. Another current term 'The Objective with the Infinitive' is also unsatisfactory since it seems to exclude cases like I hate my brother to go away where brother is in the common case.
L. P. Vinokurova uses the term 'The Objective Infinitive Construction' which is better in many respects, and first of all because the syntactical construction gets a syntactical name, but there exists another objective infinitive construction with the preposition for (as in the sentence I am waiting for you to go) which the same author calls 'the for-to-infinitive construction' — a very inconvenient name and inconsistent too. We should prefer to call these complexes 'The prepositional (or prepositionless) objective infinitive complex' in the same way as we distinguish prepositional and prepositionless objects in general 3.
A complex object may also be an 'objective participle complex', as in I heard the key turning in the lock, an 'objective gerund complex' prepositional, as in All depends on Tom coming in time, or prepositionless, as in Excuse him coming so late.
_________________________________________________
3 Naturally, in sentences like For him to go there is a feat, or Here are some books for you to read the infinitive complexes may be defined as a 'prepositional subjective infinitive complex' and a 'prepositional attributive infinitive complex' respectively.
§ 449. Besides the well-known features of similarity between the object and the subject (e. g. their being expressed by nouns or noun-equivalents, the correspondence between objects of active constructions and subjects of passive constructions or vice versa) we should like to point out some minor points of resemblance between them in the use of the pronoun it.
In simple sentences it is used as an introductory structural subject or object preceding a notional subject or object expressed by an infinitive (or an infinitival complex) or a gerund (a gerundial complex). Cf.:
1. It was difficult to refuse.
2. Itis necessary for you to go there.
3. It was strange his having changed his mind all of a sudden.
1. I felt itdifficult to refuse.
2. I consider itnecessary for you to go there.
3. I thought itstrange his having changed his mind all of a sudden.
In sentences like the often quoted example from Jerome K. Jerome: We therefore decided that we would sleep out on fine nights; and hotel it, and inn it, and pub it, like respectable folks, when itwas wet, both the last it which is the subject and the preceding three it's used as objects do not indicate anything in reality, they are purely structural elements in the sentence, syntactical word-morphemes.
§ 450. In Russian, where case inflexions are the most important means of expressing the relations of nouns to other words in the sentence (see § 100), objective complements are primarily divided into direct(expressed by prepositionless 'accusative case' forms) and indirect(all others). Indirect objects are then divided into prepositional and preposition-less.
The number of verbs that may take a direct object is much greater in English than in Russian. It is partly due to the fact that the common case of nouns and the objective case of pronouns in English correspond to all the oblique cases of the Russian language. The Russian ñîîáùàòü, çàâèäîâàòü, ïîìîãàòü ñîñåäó would be rendered by to inform, envy, help the neighbour, îáìåíÿòüñÿ ñëîâàìè, âçãëÿäàìè by exchange words, glances, etc.
| <== previous lecture | | | next lecture ==> |
| Predicative Complements (Predicatives) | | | Adverbial Complements |