No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 June 2016
Infinitive phrases have a wide range of function within the matrix sentence. They can act as expansions of the verb, and as such they can be either marked or unmarked, either transitive or intransitive; they can replace nouns, and can therefore function as subjects, subjective complements, direct objects, objective complements (either marked or unmarked by to), as objects of prepositions, or appositives; they can function as modifiers of sentences, nouns, verbs, adjectives, and in a sense adverbs. But the outer structure of an infinitive phrase (i.e., its structure within the matrix sentence) is no more important than the inner structure, even though most of the traditional work done on infinitives has been done in reference to the outer structure. This article is therefore concerned with the outer structure only insofar as it relates to the inner structure. As it is concerned to a large extent with functional, rather than formal, relationships, the presentation is informal, since there is some disagreement among transformational linguists as to how functional relationships should be displayed.
See LeesR. B., “English infinitives1,” Lang. 36 (1960), pp. 212–21 for a formalization of some of the relationships between the infinitive nominal, the factive nominal, and the gerundive nominal; for a formalization of it-expletive and it-personal-pronoun constructions containing infinitives; for such nominalizations as He is able to go → his ability to go; for some of the special attributes of adjectives that co-occur with infinitives, etc. See also LeesR. B., “English infinitives1,” IJAL26 (1960), esp. pp. 71–85 and 94–95.
2 For, the frequent marker of the subject of an infinitive phrase, must sometimes be introduced as an optional or obligatory part of the lexical item: e.g., I wished (for) Mary to drive the car, and I arranged for Mary to drive the car; sometimes as part of a general rule of grammar: e.g., (In order) for John to get good grades, he had to study hard; and sometimes as a geographically or socially determined element, e.g.: I would like (for) you to have a good time.
3 Roman type here and in the other examples throughout this article indicates words which must be deleted.
4 For the structure of verbs of this class, see Chomsky, Noam, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1965), pp. 129 and 131.Google Scholar
5 These verbs will have to be individually marked for the way that they accept the perfect expansion. Such verbs as appear, happen, have got, ought, and seem follow the pattern appear to have V-en, while such verbs as come and have follow the pattern have come-en to V. Such verbs as call and used are not expanded for perfect aspect. The progressive expansion does not normally apply to any verbs of this class.
6 In his “Transformational Grammars and the Fries Framework,” a paper read at the linguistics section of the Midwest Modern Language Association on April 27, 1962, and reprinted in Allen, H. B. (ed.), Readings in Applied English Linguistics, 2nd ed. (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1964), pp. 137–46 Google Scholar, R. B. Lees analyzed this type of structure as follows:
In addition to compel, verbs of this class would include ask, force, (would) like, persuade, suppose, tell, urge, want, wish, etc. It should be pointed out that factive nominals can follow ask, suppose, wish, etc., and that the verb in the factive nominal is subjunctive, e.g.: I asked him to come → I asked that he (would) come. Note, however, that he/him is the specified receiver of the action only in I asked him to come.
7 In this type of construction, the adverb and infinitive co-occur. There is no sentence *She was strong to survive, with this same meaning. Traditional grammarians generally say that the infinitive is modifying the adverb in such constructions, but this is probably not the case.