infinitive clauses

Hello Voxii

Welcome to this Forum. I am an English learner from Japan. Here we have many native English speakers who are versed in grammar. So I think I had better wait until some of them comes to answer your question. But if you don't mind it, let me throw my two yens worth (I'm a Japanese).

1. 
   
   I want him to come home.
   
   
2. 
   
   I told him to go home.

Thanks Paco,

So ... you say "him to come home" is the direct object. Yes, I think you are right. However, several people I have spoken to, including linguists, claim that "him" is the direct object and "to come home" is the object complement. You and I are in a minority ... so far!

Best wishes,

voxxi

Oh, and further, regarding your second sentence ... you paraphrased it using a noun clause. Am I to assume that the infinitive is nominative?

-v

Hello

Some infinitive clauses are difficult to be grouped into "nominative use", "adjectival use" or "adverbial use". Take "to go home" in "I told him to go home", for example. This "to go home" is the target to which "I" directed "him" by the action "tell". If one paraphrases this sentence, it would be "I told him so" rather than "I told him it".
paco

Paco2004Hello

Some infinitive clauses are difficult to be grouped into "nominative use", "adjectival use" or "adverbial use". Take "to go home" in "I told him to go home", for example. This "to go home" is the target to which "I" directed "him" by the action "tell". If one paraphrases this sentence, it would be "I told him so" rather than "I told him it". paco

Hello

Yes, you're right. If I'm forced to group the infinitive "to go home" from the standpoint of syntactic sentence patterns into one of "nominative use", "adjectival use" and "adverbial use, I would choose "nominative use". But, from the semantic standpoint, "to go home" seems to me to function somehow as the complement of "him" and somehow as the adverb of "told". It is very subtle.

I'm willing to join your group in saying that "him to come home" is the direct object of "want". The "for ... to ..." clause is "for him to come home". This, as a whole, is what is wanted, so it is the direct object of "want". The "for" is always deleted after the verb "want".

CJ

Hello CJ

It's long time since I saw your last post. How it's going with you?

CalifJimI'm willing to join your group in saying that "him to come home" is the direct object of "want". The "for ... to ..." clause is "for him to come home". This, as a whole, is what is wanted, so it is the direct object of "want". The "for" is always deleted after the verb "want".

Hi,

We can come full circle, maybe. At the beginning, I asked whether the sentence was O + OC or simply O, and we have agreed it was O, but to determine the phrase group it is instructive to look at O + OC constructions with (often elided) "to be" infinitive elements. The infinitive -- paralleling the S + V + SC construction -- does not determine whether the C is adjectival or nominativ

Hello Vox

Briefly, then, why not similarly go past the infinitive to "home" to find the grouping?

I can't get this part. Could you explain it in other way?

paco