Complements in Clauses

4.1 Introduction

This chapter focuses on complements within the verb phrase (VP), distinguishing them from adjuncts (discussed in Chapter 8).
The analysis primarily concerns canonical clauses, where each clause has a head predicate in the form of a VP, and each VP has a head verb (V).
The head verb is crucial in determining the grammatical structure of the clause.

4.1.1 Predicates and Heads

The term 'head' became common in the late 20th century.
Clause structure analysis uses 'subject' and 'predicate' as major elements.
In a clause like "All cows eat grass," "all cows" is the subject, and "eat grass" is the predicate.
The predicate semantically describes what is said about the subject.
'Predicate' is a specific term for the head of a clause; the head of the predicate is the head verb (e.g., "eat").

4.1.2 Diagramming Clause Structure

Example clause: "All cows eat grass."
Diagram [1] represents function and category of units.
Constituents (words, phrases, clauses):
- "All cows eat grass" is a clause.
- The clause is divided into subject and predicate.
- Subject precedes the predicate.
- Subject is a noun phrase (NP), predicate is a VP.
- VP contains a head and an object.
- Head of VP precedes the object.
- Head is labelled V, object is labelled NP.
- "All" is a determinative, head of a determinative phrase (DP).
- "Eat" is a verb; "cows" and "grass" are nouns.
No function is assigned to the clause itself.
Units are given dual labels: function in the containing construction and category.

4.1.3 An Abbreviatory Convention for Diagrams

When the structure inside some phrase is not relevant, we use a triangle to cover that bit of the structure.
Diagram [1] can be compacted to diagram [2].
Compact diagram assumes "all" is a determinative, "cows" is a noun, etc.
Compact version reduces visual clutter when internal NP structure is not the focus.

4.1.4 Lexical Heads Determine Some Phrase Contents

The lexical head of the VP largely determines the clause's contents.
Verbs like "like" require an object; "keep" (retain ownership) requires an object.
Lexical heads license complements of a certain sort.
Many English verbs license an object, but some do not (e.g., arise, elapse, expire, faint, fall, seethe, vanish).
Example: "*The dog vanished the water" is ungrammatical, but "The dog vanished" and "The dog vanished into the water" are grammatical.
Some verbs license constituents other than objects within the VP.
"Tom seemed very angry": "seem" licenses an adjective phrase (AdjP) predicative complement ("very angry").
"These insults made Tom very angry": "make" licenses an object ("Tom") and a predicative complement ("very angry").
Diagram [3] illustrates these structures.
Whether an object and/or predicative complement is allowed depends on which verb is the head verb.

4.1.5 Complements and Modifiers

Dependents in a VP are either complements or modifiers.
Complements are licensed by the head verb.
The object is a type of complement.
Licensing is illustrated with "devour," "eat," and "dine" in [4]:
- devour: object required (transitive)
- eat: object optional (transitive)
- dine: object forbidden (intransitive)
Example: [4]
- i. a. Have you devoured the fish?
- b. *Have you devoured? [object required]
- ii. a. Have you eaten the fish?
- b. Have you eaten? [object optional]
- iii. a. *Have you dined the fish?
- b. Have you dined? [object forbidden]
Objects are admissible with "devour" and "eat" (transitive verbs), but not "dine" (intransitive verb).
Objects qualify as complements because their admissibility depends on the verb.
With "eat" the object is optional, but with "devour" it is obligatory.
Modifiers are not restricted like complements; they can occur freely (but should be semantically appropriate).
AdjPs and DPs generally cannot be modifiers in VPs.
Examples in [5] illustrate complements (underlined) and modifiers (in brackets).
Modifiers (e.g., "without asking for details," "this morning," "even now," "not that anyone knew") can be omitted without making the sentence ungrammatical.
Complements are often obligatory.
Changing a lexical head can yield ungrammatical results if the replacement doesn't license the complement.

4.1.6 Subjects Are External Complements

Objects are complements in the VP as they satisfy the licensing requirement.
The subject is also a kind of complement, but the reasoning differs.
All canonical clauses contain a subject.
Restrictions exist on what categories can be subjects for certain VPs.
Example: [6]
- i. Whether we will finish on time depends primarily on the weather.
- ii. *Whether we will finish on time infuriated me.
The underlined subordinate clause in [6i] is licensed by the VP.
Many verbs (e.g., infuriate, see, think, yearn) do not license subjects of this form.
Some verbs uniquely determine the subject (e.g., "rain," "snow" require "it").
Subjects are complements located outside the VP, referred to as external complements. Other complements inside the VP are internal complements.

4.2 The Subject

4.2.1 Distinctive Syntactic Properties of the Subject in English

Subjects are typically NPs or subordinate clauses.
Subjects are distinguished by a combination of syntactic properties:
- Basic Position: Before the VP.
- Case: Nominative case for personal pronouns.
- Verb Agreement: Verbs agree with the subject in the present tense.
- Subject–Auxiliary Inversion: Subject appears after an auxiliary verb.
Case:
- NPs concerned are mainly personal pronouns.
- Example: [7]
  - i. NOMINATIVE: I he she we they
  - ii. ACCUSATIVE: me him her us them
- Pronouns must be nominative as subjects and accusative as objects.
- In English only pronouns show case distinctions.
- Example: [8]
  - i. a. They barked at the visitors.
  - b. *Them barked at the visitors.
  - ii. a. The dogs barked at them.
  - b. *The dogs barked at they.
- "The dogs" can only be replaced by nominative "they"; "the visitors" by accusative "them."
Verb Agreement:
- All verbs other than modal auxiliaries agree with the subject in the present tense.
- "Be" also agrees in the preterite.
- Example: [9]
  - i. a. Pat was fond of the children.
  - b. The children were fond of Pat.
  - ii. a. Pat loves the children.
  - b. The children love Pat.
Subject-Auxiliary Inversion:
- Subject appears after an auxiliary verb in closed interrogative clauses.
- We can see that "Pat" is the subject of the [9a] examples, and "the children" is the subject of the [9b] examples, simply by comparing these clauses with their closed interrogative counterparts in [10]:
  - Example: [10]
    - i. a. Was Pat fond of the children?
    - b. Were the children fond of Pat?
    - ii. a. Does Pat love the children?
    - b. Do the children love Pat?
  - In [i] we have simply inverted the subject and the auxiliary verb be, whereas in [ii], where the declarative contains no auxiliary verb, the interrogative has dummy do and this precedes the subject.
  - Be qualifies as an auxiliary verb precisely because it doesn’t take do in the closed interrogative.

4.2.2 Traditional Errors in Defining the Subject

Traditional grammar definitions of 'subject' are based on meaning, which is often vague, and do not always work.
Traditional definitions:
- In action clauses, the subject corresponds semantically to the agent.
- The subject commonly identifies a topic for the clause.
Problems with traditional definitions:
- They over-generalize the correlation between subject and agent/topic.
- The correlation between subject and agent, or between subject and topic, is far too complex for the above definitions to work at the LANGUAGE- PARTICULAR level
Subject and Agent Examples where the old-fashioned definition fails: [11]

i. She knows French literature really well.
ii. Ernie suffered a heart attack last night.
iii. He underwent a lengthy operation at the hands of a heart surgeon.
iv. My grandmother was attacked by two vicious dogs.

*   In example i. there is no action. Being acquainted with a body of literature isn’t an action: it’s a state
*   In example ii. and iii. The referent of the syntactic subject doesn’t have a semantic role anything like ‘doer of the action’ in such cases.
*   Example iv. is an exception because it does describe an action, but the NP two vicious dogs, which is a complement inside a PP with by as its head is the agent role.

Subject and Topic Examples where the definition of 'subject' as 'topic of the sentence' is hopeless: [12]

i. Something is wrong with this disk drive.
ii. In space, no one can hear you scream.
iii. It’s high time these kids were in bed.
iv. You should be really careful when handling metallic potassium.

*   In example i. the topic is the disk drive.
*   In example ii. the topic is what it’s like in the airless void of space, and if any phrase identifies that topic, it’s the preposed adjunct in space.
*   In example iii. the subject it is a pronoun with no identifiable meaning. It doesn’t set a topic.
*   And example iv. is about the dangers of handling metallic potassium.

4.3 The Object

4.3.1 Distinctive Syntactic Properties of the Object in English

The object is a post-head complement type in a VP, typically with the form of an NP.
Unlike the subject, it’s located within the VP, and is not as sharply distinguished from other dependents as the subject is.
Syntactic Properties of the object: [13]
- An object is a complement, so it must be LICENSED by the verb.
- With some verbs, the object is OBLIGATORY.
- The object typically corresponds to the subject of a corresponding PASSIVE clause.
- The object can usually take the form of a PERSONAL PRONOUN, which must be in the accusative case if it is one of those listed in [7].
- The basic object position is IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE HEAD VERB.
Example: distinguishing the object NP in [14a] from the adjunct NP in [b]: [14]

OBJECT NP ADJUNCT NP
a. Ed told the manager. b. Ed arrived last week.
The object the manager is licensed by the transitive verb tell: it could not occur with an intransitive verb like arrive (*Ed arrived the manager is ungrammatical). But there are no verbs that grammatically disallow the adjunct last week.
With tell it is possible to omit the object, as in Ed won’t tell, where an object is understood but not expressed, but some verbs are syntactically required to have an object when they occur in a canonical clause: attempting to use verbs like accost, delineate, force, or resemble without an object yields ungrammatical results. By contrast, there are no verbs which require that an adjunct like last week be present in the clause.
Example [14a] has an associated passive clause with the manager as subject: The manager was told (by Ed). There is, however, no passive counterpart of [b]: *Last week was arrived (by Ed).
The manager in [a] can be replaced by an appropriate personal pronoun (him, her, it, or them): Ed told him or Ed told her. No such replacement is possible for last week in [b]: *Ed arrived it is ungrammatical.
In [a] we can’t normally insert anything between the verb and its object, as shown by *Ed told unexpectedly the manager (instead we get Ed unexpectedly told the manager or Ed told the manager unexpectedly). There is no such restriction in [b]: Ed arrived unexpectedly last week.

4.3.2 Direct and Indirect Objects

Two subtypes of object: direct and indirect objects.
Ditransitive clauses = direct and indirect objects occurring together.
Indirect object (Oi) cannot occur alone, and precedes the direct object (Od): [15]

S Oi Od
a. Sue gave Max the photo.
b. I bought them new shoes.
S = subject, Oi = indirect object, and Od = direct object.
Direct object is more directly involved in the situation than the indirect object.
Indirect object is characteristically associated with the semantic role of recipient, as in these examples.
Simplistic definitions based on semantic role do not work.
Alternation with a PP Construction: [16]
S Od Comp:PP
a. Sue gave the photo to Max.
b. We bought shoes for them.
Although the meanings are the same as in [15], the syntactic structure is different.
The PPs to Max and for them are complements, but they are not objects: they don’t have the properties summarized in [13iii– v].
Syntactic Distinction between Direct and Indirect Object:
Main syntactic property = position: indirect precedes direct in ditransitive clauses.
Direct object readily undergoes fronting, indirect object is resistant to it.
There is no doubt that the acceptability of fronting is generally significantly lower for an indirect object (that is, for an NP that would be an indirect object if it hadn’t been fronted) than for direct objects.
Various non-canonical constructions: $ [17]
FRONTED DIRECT OBJECT
FRONTED INDIRECT OBJECT
i a. Everything else, she gave me. b. %Me, she gave everything else.
ii a. What did she buy him? b. *Who did she buy these shoes?
iii a. He kept the gifts [which she had given him]. b. %They interviewed everyone [whom she had given gifts].
iv a. What a lot of work he gave them! b. *What a lot of them he gave work!

4.4 Predicative Complements

Most commonly have NP form. [18]

PredComp Obj
i a. Stacy was a good speaker. b. Stacy found a good speaker.
ii a. Stacy became a friend of mine. b. Stacy met a friend of mine.
There is a sharp semantic distinction: the object NPs refer to PARTICIPANTS in the situation. Both [ib] and [iib] involve two people, one referred to by the subject, the other by the object.
The predicative NPs, however, do not refer to participants like this. There is only a single person involved in the [a] examples, the one referred to by the subject NP Stacy.
The predicative complement NP does not refer to another person; it denotes a PROPERTY that is ascribed to Stacy.
One such verb is prove: [19]
S PredComp S Obj
a. This proved a great asset. b. This proved the theorem.
Again, the objects denote participants but the predicative complements don’t.
Distinguished syntactically in a number of ways.

4.4.1 Contrasting Predicative Complements with Objects

PredComp Can Have the Form of AdjP

Both Obj and PredComp can have the form of an ordinary NP, but only PredComp can also have the form of an adjective phrase (AdjP): [21]
PredComp Obj
i a. He became a lawyer. b. He hired a lawyer.
ii a. He became so anxious. b. *He hired so anxious.
PredComp Can Have the Form of a Bare Role NP: [22]
PredComp Obj
i a. She became the treasurer. b. She knew the treasurer.
ii a. She became treasurer. b. *She knew treasurer.
PredComp Does Not Correspond to Passive Subject: [23]
ACTIVE PASSIVE
i a. Ed insulted a friend of mine. b. A friend of mine was insulted by Ed.
ii a. Ed became a friend of mine. b. *A friend of mine was become by Ed.
PredComp Can (Marginally) Be a Nominative Pronoun: [24]
PredComp Obj
a. %It was they who started it. b. She accused them of starting it.

4.4.2 Subject-Oriented and Object-Oriented PredComps

Most predicative complements are subject-oriented.
A second kind relates to the object.
Example: [25]

SUBJECT-ORIENTED PREDCOMP OBJECT-ORIENTED PREDCOMP
a. Ted seems highly untrustworthy. b. I consider Wally highly untrustworthy.
In [a], the PredComp relates to the subject, Ted: the property of being highly untrustworthy is ascribed to Ted.
In [b], the same property is ascribed to Wally, but in this case Wally is a direct object.

4.4.3 Ascriptive and Specifying Uses of the Verb Be

Ascriptive construction: predicative complement picks out a property that is ascribed to a predicand. [26]
Specifying construction: two entities are claimed to be the same. [26]

ASCRIPTIVE SPECIFYING
i a. Mike was a loyal party member. b. The best person for the job was Jane.
ii a. What they gave me was useless. b. What they gave me was a fountain pen.

Ascriptive/Specifying Ambiguity

Example: $ [27]
I thought he was a friend of mine.

Syntactic Differences

The semantic difference illustrated in [26] is reflected in the syntax in various ways.

SPECIFYING ASCRIPTIVE
i a. The one they arrested was Max. b. The next point is more serious.
ii a. Max was the one they arrested. b. More serious is the next point.
When we reverse the order in the specifying construction we change the func- tions. So while Max is predicative complement in [ia], that is not its function in [iia]: there Max is subject. This can be demonstrated by applying the closed interrogative test for subjects: the closed interrogative counterpart of [ia] is Was the one they arrested Max? while that of [iia] is Was Max the one they arrested? – with Max now in the distinctive subject position following the auxiliary.
With the ascriptive construction it is generally impossible or extremely unnatural to reverse the two elements (compare Sue was treasurer with *Treasurer was Sue, or Ed was anxious with *Anxious was Ed). When reversal is acceptable the effect is merely to reorder them, not to change their functions: more serious is understood as a predicative complement in the non-canonical [iib], with the next point as predicand, just as in the canonical [ib]. That means we can’t invert it with the auxiliary verb to form a closed interrogative, because it’s not the subject. That’s why *Is more serious the next point? is ungrammatical.

4.5 Overview of Complementation in VPs

4.5.1 Objects and Predicative Complements

Five structures for canonical clauses: intransitive, transitive, ditransitive, intransitive with predicative complement, and transitive with predicative complement.
Example of the five structures: [29]

STRUCTURE EXAMPLE
i subject + intransitive verb I trembled.
ii subject + intransitive verb + predicative complement She felt happy.
iii subject + transitive verb + direct object He sells cars.
iv subject + transitive verb + direct object + predicative complement It made me fat.
v subject + transitive verb + indirect object + direct object I gave him food.
Terms like ‘intransitive’ can apply to clause, verb phrase, and verb alike:
A very large number occur in both intransitive and transitive clauses (e.g., eat, as in They were eating and They were eating fruit), or in both transitive and ditransitive clauses (e.g., buy, as in We bought some flowers and We bought them some flowers).
So when the terms are used for verbs, they typically apply to particular USES of the verbs.

4.5.2 PP Complements

Complements can also be PPs
Examples of the PP complement: [30-31]

[30] i We asked for an adjournment. [intransitive]
ii He congratulated her on her promotion. [transitive]
[31] i We walked to school. [intransitive]
ii I put the meat in the freezer. [transitive]
PPs can also function as predicative complements, as in He was in a bad temper, or I regard this as outrageous, or It seemed like a good idea (where it is a predicand, not the meaningless dummy it found in It seems that he’s out; see §14.4.1).

4.5.3 Subordinate Clause Complements

Subordinate clauses can be complements (tensed or tenseless)
Here are some initial examples, the underlined clauses in [32] being tensed, those in [33] tenseless:

[32] i They complained that there was no hot water. [intransitive]
ii He informed me that the secretary had resigned. [transitive]
[33] i I hope to see you again soon. [intransitive]
ii This persuaded me to change my tactics. [transitive]
*
These constructions will be dealt with in more detail in the chapters dealing with subordinate clauses: Chapter 11 for finites and Chapter 14 for non-finites.