0
Cho7712 Posted 12 years ago
Grammar
causative get
I just found some abstruse explnation about causative 'get' in the CGEL.
[quote: 1236page]
[41]i.He got a specialist to examine his son.
ii.He got his son to be examined by a specialist.
iii.He got his son examined by a specialist.
...BUT iii is not an alternative of ii: get takes a raised object in the past-participial construction (which has no active counterpart.)
Until encounterting this informaton, I've known that the first example can be changed into [iii] retaining the same meaning.
Based on the information in the book, what do you think is the difference in meaning between the first example sentence and [iii]?
[quote: 1236page]
[41]i.He got a specialist to examine his son.
ii.He got his son to be examined by a specialist.
iii.He got his son examined by a specialist.
...BUT iii is not an alternative of ii: get takes a raised object in the past-participial construction (which has no active counterpart.)
Until encounterting this informaton, I've known that the first example can be changed into [iii] retaining the same meaning.
Based on the information in the book, what do you think is the difference in meaning between the first example sentence and [iii]?
Top answer
(ii) Sounds very odd. I'd call it wrong. (i) Puts the emphasis on 'a specialist'.
- (ii) Sounds very odd.
- I'd call it wrong.
- (i) Puts the emphasis on 'a specialist'.
- eg His family doctor could not help, so he got a specialist to examine his son.
- (iii) Puts the emphasis on 'his son'.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
6 Answers
0
(ii) Sounds very odd. I'd call it wrong.
(i) Puts the emphasis on 'a specialist'.
eg His family doctor could not help, so he got a specialist to examine his son.
(iii) Puts the emphasis on 'his son'.
(i) Puts the emphasis on 'a specialist'.
eg His family doctor could not help, so he got a specialist to examine his son.
(iii) Puts the emphasis on 'his son'.
00
Clive(ii) Sounds very odd. I'd call it wrong.It sounds wrong to me too.
00
Thank you all for your answers.
Now I know the difference between 1 and iii.
However, I don't understand why (ii) is grammatically wrong. (ii) seems to be well-constructed.
Can I know the reason why (ii) is ruled out?
Now I know the difference between 1 and iii.
However, I don't understand why (ii) is grammatically wrong. (ii) seems to be well-constructed.
Can I know the reason why (ii) is ruled out?
00
cho7712Thank you all for your answers.Now I know the difference between 1 and iii. However, I don't understand why (ii) is grammatically wrong. (ii) seems to be well-constructed. Can I know the reason why (ii) is ruled out?There is a mismatch between "He got his son to ...", which means that he caused his son to perform some action, and "... to be examined",
00
0
cho7712Thank you all for your answers.Now I know the difference between 1 and iii. However, I don't understand why (ii) is grammatically wrong. (ii) seems to be well-constructed. Can I know the reason why (ii) is ruled out?
There is a mismatch between "He got his son to ...", which means that he caused his son to perform some action, and "... to be
0
Related Questions