Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T09:02:39.129Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Complementation with Verbs of Choice in English

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Patrick Duffley  and
Rafika Abida
Patrick Duffley
Affiliation:
Université Laval
Rafika Abida
Affiliation:
Université Laval
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study addresses both the practical question of what forms of complementation are found with verbs expressing the notion of choice in English and the theoretical question of explaining the control and temporal effects found with these verbs. The explanation proposed is based on an approach in which syntax is taken to be driven by semantics. Semantics is defined in terms of the meaning-content associated with the linguistic forms occurring in the constructions examined, namely the to-infinitive, the gerund-participle, and the lexical content of the different verbs of choice themselves, together with the semantic value of the complement’s function with respect to the main verb. Although it does not utilize a corpus in the strict sense of the word, nor employ statistical argumentation, the study is based mainly on an examination of attested usage in Canadian English as reflected by Canadian websites accessed in the fall of 2006.

Résumé

Résumé

Il est traité dans la présente étude à la fois de la question pratique de recenser les formes de compléments possibles avec les verbes exprimant l’idée de choix en anglais et de l’explication théorique des effets de sens impliquant les phénomènes de contrôle et de temporalité avec ces verbes. L’explication est fondée sur le postulat que la syntaxe est conditionnée par la sémantique, cette dernière étant définie par les signifiés des formes linguistiques effectivement employées dans les séquences en question, c’est-à-dire l’infinitif, le participe-gérondif et les lexèmes des verbes de choix, ainsi que la valeur sémantique de la fonction que remplit le complément par rapport au verbe de la principale. Bien que l’étude ne soit pas fondée sur un corpus au sens strict, ni sur des statistiques, elle emploie comme données des occurrences attestées trouvées sur des sites web canadiens à l’automne 2006.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 54 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 1 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bloom, Lois, Tackeff, Jo, and Lahey, Margaret. 1984. Learning to in complement constructions. Journal of Child Language 11:391–406.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric, and Hornstein, Norbert. 2004. Movement under control. Linguistic Inquiry 35:431–452.Google Scholar
British National Corpus. 2001. Oxford: Oxford University Computing Services.Google Scholar
Brown University Corpus of American English. 1964. Providence, RI: Department of Linguistics, Brown University.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter W., and Jackendoff, Ray. 2005. Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Duffley, Patrick J. 1992. The English infinitive. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Duffley, Patrick J. 2006. The English gerund-participle: A comparison with the infinitive. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Duffley, Patrick J., and Fisher, Ryan. 2005. Verb + to + infinitive vs. verb + to + gerund-participle: A preliminary exploration. Langues et linguistique 31:31–61.Google Scholar
Duffley, Patrick J., and Joubert, Jean-François. 1999. The gerund and the infinitive with the verbs intend, mean, propose and their close synonyms. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 44:251–266.Google Scholar
Freed, Alice F. 1979. The semantics of English aspectual complementation. Boston, MA: D. Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-9475-1Google Scholar
Gove, Philip B. 1996. Webster’s third new international dictionary, unabridged. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.Google Scholar
Guillaume, Gustave. 1984. Foundations for a science of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hamawand, Zeki. 2002. Atemporal complement clauses in English: A cognitive grammar analysis. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Hirtle, Walter H. 1995. The simple form again: An analysis of direction-giving and related uses. Journal of Pragmatics 24:265–281.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, and Pullum, Geoffrey K. 2002. Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Los, Bettelou. 2005. The rise of the to-infinitive. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Manzini, Maria Rita. 1983. On control and control theory. Linguistic Inquiry 14:421–446.Google Scholar
O’Grady, William. 2005. Syntactic carpentry: An emergentist approach to syntax. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, Peter S. 1967. The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ruhl, Charles. 1989. On monosemy: A study in linguistic semantics. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A., and Pollard, Carl. 1991. An integrated theory of complement control. Language 67:63–113.Google Scholar
Stowell, Tim. 1982. The tense of infinitives. Linguistic Inquiry 13:561–570.Google Scholar