 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
160
he became hoarse.)
Apart from the described types of subject-sharing sentences there is a variety of them featuring the dominant
verb in the passive. E.g.:
The idea has never been considered a wise one. The company was ordered to halt
These sentences have active counterparts as their paradigmatic derivation bases which we analyse below as
semi-complex sentences of object sharing.
§ 4. Semi-complex sentences of object-sharing, as different from those of subject-sharing, are built up of
two base sentences overlapping round the word performing different functions in them: in the matrix sentence it
is the object, in the insert sentence it is the subject. The complicator expansion of such sentences is commonly
called the "complex object". E.g.:
We saw him. + He approached us. > We saw him approach us (approaching us). They painted the fence. +
The fence was (became) green. > They painted the fence green.
Some dominant verbs of such constructions are not used in the same essential meaning outside the
constructions, in particular, some causative verbs, verbs of liking and disliking, etc. Cf.:
* I made him. + He obeyed. > I made him obey.
This fact, naturally, reflects a very close unity of the constituents of such constructions, but, in our opinion,
it cannot be looked upon as excluding the constructions from the syntactic subsystem in question; rather, the
subsystem should be divided into the subsets of "free" object-sharing and "bound" object-sharing.
The adjunct to the shared object is expressed by an infinitive, a present or past participle, an adjective, a
noun, depending on the structural type of the insert sentence (namely, on its being verbal or nominal).
As is seen from the above, the paradigmatic (derivational) explanation of the sentence with a "complex
object" saves much descriptive space and, which is far more important, is at once generalizing and practicable.*
As for the relations between the two connected events expressed by the object-sharing sentence, they are of the
three basic types: first, relations of simultaneity in the same place; second, relations of cause and result, third,
relations of mental attitude towards the event (events thought of, spoken of, wished for, liked or disliked, etc.).
All these types of relations can be explicated by the corresponding transformations of the semi-complex
sentences into pleni-complex sentences.
* Cf. the classical "syntagmatic" explanation of constructions with complex objects in the cited BA. Ilyish's book, p. 257 ff.
Simultaneity in the same place is expressed by constructions with dominant verbs of perceptions (see, hear,
feel, smell, etc.). E.g.:
He felt the morning breeze gently touching his face. > He felt the morning breeze as it was gently touching
his face. I never heard the word pronounced like that. > I never heard the word as it was pronounced like that.
Cause and result relations are rendered by constructions with dominant causative verbs taking three types of
complex objects: an unmarked infinitival complex object (the verbs make, let, get, have, help); a nounal or
adjectival complex object (the verbs call, appoint, keep, paint, etc.); a participial complex object (the verbs set,
send, keep, etc.). Cf.:
I helped Jo find the photo. > I helped Jo so that he found the photo. The cook beat the meat soft. > The
cook beat the meat so that it was (became) soft.
Different mental presentations of the complicator event are effected, respectively, by verbs of mental
perceptions and thinking (think, believe, expect, find, etc.); verbs of speech (tell, ask, report, announce, etc.);
verbs of wish: verbs of liking and disliking. Cf.:
You will find many things strange here. > You will find that many things are strange here. I didn't mean
my words to hurt you. > I didn't mean that my words should hurt you.
Semi-complex sentences of the object-sharing type, as we have stated above, are closely related to sentences
of the subject-sharing type. Structurally this is expressed in the fact that they can be transformed into the
passive, their passive counterparts forming the corresponding subject-sharing constructions. Cf.:
We watched the plane disappear behind the distant clouds. > The plane was watched to disappear behind
the distant clouds. They washed the floor clean. > The floor was washed clean.
Between the two series of constructions, i.e. active and passive, equivalence of the event-relations is
observed, so that the difference in their basic meaning is inherent in the difference between the verbal active
and passive as such.
§ 5. Semi-complex sentences of attributive complication are derived from two base sentences having an