Anticipatory IT

Question

Hello everybody, I'm a new member, I'm French and I study English.
I have a little problem in English grammar and I would like you to help me because I have a final exam on April, 2nd (next week).

We have learnt about extrapositary IT, also called anticipatory IT, in utterances such as :
(1) "It is obvious that he'll succeed."
>> The proposition "that he'll succeed" is the notional subjet of the whole utterance. One could say "That he'll succeed is obvious"
So, in the phrase "It is obvious that he'll succeed", can we say that "that he'll succeed" is an adjective complement of "obvious" ??
Besides, I have another question... What is the nature of "that he'll succeed"? Nominal clause or not ? I think it's a nominal clause because it could be replaced by the anticipatory IT.

Now, I have another problem

(2) "It is important for me to succeed."
Same questions : what are the nature and function of the prop "for me to succeed" in "It is important for me to succeed" ? I do know that it is the notional subject of BE IMPORTANT but is that all ?

I thank you so much for your answers, I'm so stressed about this exam !!
Thank you !

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

~~Charlene~~(1) "It is obvious that he'll succeed."
>> The proposition "that he'll succeed" is the notional subjet of the whole utterance. One could say "That he'll succeed is obvious"
So, in the phrase "It is obvious that he'll succeed", can we say that "that he'll succeed" is an adjective complement of "obvious" ??

Hi;

If you rewrite the sentence:

That he'll succeed is obvious.

- - - Subject - - - - - verb (is) - - complement

You see that the subject is the clause, That he'll succeed. So it is a noun clause. The complement is the adjective obvious.

CalifJim · Answer

~~Charlene~~April, 2nd (next week)

Surely you mean May!

~~Charlene~~can we say that "that he'll succeed" is an adjective complement of "obvious"

No. As Alphecca says, "obvious" is the complement.

~~Charlene~~What is the nature of "that he'll succeed"? Nominal clause or not ?

Yes. It's a nominal clause.

~~Charlene~~"for me to succeed" in "It is important for me to succeed"

It's a FOR ... TO ... clause. It functions the same as the that-clause in your previous example. (It's possible that the grammar method you are learning does not talk about FOR ... TO ... clauses. Maybe they call it an infinitival clause. You will need to consult your teacher and your textbooks about this.)

CJ

-Charlene- · Answer

Ok, thank you all of you, it was very helpful.

Of course, my exam is in May, I'm just a bit tired...

I have another problem to submit

"He never took steps to make himself liked"

"He never took steps for other people to like him"

What are the nature and function of

(1)"to make himself liked"

(2)"for other people to like him"

My teacher told me that the (1) was a non-finite relative clause whose antecedent is "steps" but what about (2) ?

I thought of a non-finite adverbial clause of aim, but semantically, it clearly complements "steps". Is (2) another relative clause?

I'M LOST ...

Thank you for your help...

CalifJim · Answer

~~Charlene~~but what about (2) ? ... Is (2) another relative clause?

Yes. Same idea.

CJ

AlpheccaStars · Answer

~~Charlene~~I have another problem to submit
"He never took steps to make himself liked"
"He never took steps for other people to like him"

You will see and hear these kinds of clauses in English, but it would be much more common to hear this:

He never took steps so that other people would like him.

Still it is important to understand them. The verb make is rather unique in its meaning of force and being followed by this kind of clause. It can also be considered a concatenative verb.

My brother made me do it. (Young children say this all the time!)

You can see how it might have evolved from the infinitive phrase form from this example in Early Modern English:

He made me to lie down in green pastures. (23rd psalm, King James version)

Anticipatory IT

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions