Was the “Construction Infinitive without Subject” ever productive?
There's an answer about the grammatical quirk of make do, that gives an assertion about "make + [verb]" constructions
... identifies "make do" as falling into a category he calls "Incomplete Infinitival Nexus-Objects."
In ModE the construction infinitive without S[ubject] is found chiefly in the common phrase *make believe [see there]
This strikes me as unusual and perhaps archaic. Few examples exist. Was this still productive in the 19th century, whence the oldest available evidence of to make do is dated, or earlier?
Further examples of the construction would be appreciated. I'm not aware of another way to validate the implied assertion.
grammatical-structure historical-change
asked yesterday
vectoryvectory
2058
add a comment |
There's an answer about the grammatical quirk of make do, that gives an assertion about "make + [verb]" constructions
... identifies "make do" as falling into a category he calls "Incomplete Infinitival Nexus-Objects."
In ModE the construction infinitive without S[ubject] is found chiefly in the common phrase *make believe [see there]
This strikes me as unusual and perhaps archaic. Few examples exist. Was this still productive in the 19th century, whence the oldest available evidence of to make do is dated, or earlier?
Further examples of the construction would be appreciated. I'm not aware of another way to validate the implied assertion.
grammatical-structure historical-change
asked yesterday
vectoryvectory
2058
What exactly is it that strikes you as archaic? The subjectless construction? Or the construction with a subject? Or the phrase make believe? There’s no obvious antecedent to this in the quote.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
23 hours ago
add a comment |
There's an answer about the grammatical quirk of make do, that gives an assertion about "make + [verb]" constructions
... identifies "make do" as falling into a category he calls "Incomplete Infinitival Nexus-Objects."
In ModE the construction infinitive without S[ubject] is found chiefly in the common phrase *make believe [see there]
This strikes me as unusual and perhaps archaic. Few examples exist. Was this still productive in the 19th century, whence the oldest available evidence of to make do is dated, or earlier?
Further examples of the construction would be appreciated. I'm not aware of another way to validate the implied assertion.
grammatical-structure historical-change
asked yesterday
vectoryvectory
2058
There's an answer about the grammatical quirk of make do, that gives an assertion about "make + [verb]" constructions
... identifies "make do" as falling into a category he calls "Incomplete Infinitival Nexus-Objects."
In ModE the construction infinitive without S[ubject] is found chiefly in the common phrase *make believe [see there]
This strikes me as unusual and perhaps archaic. Few examples exist. Was this still productive in the 19th century, whence the oldest available evidence of to make do is dated, or earlier?
Further examples of the construction would be appreciated. I'm not aware of another way to validate the implied assertion.
grammatical-structure historical-change
grammatical-structure historical-change
asked yesterday
vectoryvectory
2058
asked yesterday
vectoryvectory
2058
asked yesterday
vectoryvectory
2058
asked yesterday
vectoryvectory
2058
asked yesterday
vectoryvectory
2058
2058
What exactly is it that strikes you as archaic? The subjectless construction? Or the construction with a subject? Or the phrase make believe? There’s no obvious antecedent to this in the quote.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
23 hours ago
add a comment |
What exactly is it that strikes you as archaic? The subjectless construction? Or the construction with a subject? Or the phrase make believe? There’s no obvious antecedent to this in the quote.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
23 hours ago
What exactly is it that strikes you as archaic? The subjectless construction? Or the construction with a subject? Or the phrase make believe? There’s no obvious antecedent to this in the quote.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
23 hours ago
What exactly is it that strikes you as archaic? The subjectless construction? Or the construction with a subject? Or the phrase make believe? There’s no obvious antecedent to this in the quote.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
23 hours ago
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f489774%2fwas-the-construction-infinitive-without-subject-ever-productive%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f489774%2fwas-the-construction-infinitive-without-subject-ever-productive%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
What exactly is it that strikes you as archaic? The subjectless construction? Or the construction with a subject? Or the phrase make believe? There’s no obvious antecedent to this in the quote.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
23 hours ago