0
Anonymous Posted 14 years ago
Grammar

Noun Clause

It seems that the following sentence contains the noun clause "him eat carrots," which is the object of the verb "makes."

She makes him eat carrots.

However, the subject of that supposed noun clause is "him," which does not seem correct because it is an objective pronoun. So, maybe "him eat carrots" is not a noun clause. But then, what do you call a group of words that has a subject -- "him" or 'he' if not a part of the object of the verb "makes" -- performing the action of a verb -- "eat" -- on an object -- "carrots"?

BTW, it seems that "eat" is used instead of "eats" because the verb is in the subjunctive mood. Also, eat cannot be an infinitive because it is not preceded by "to" or a modal verb.

Thanks!
  

Top answer

'Him' is the object of the coercive verb 'make'. 'Eat' is a bare infinitive complement of 'make'. 'Carrots' is the object of 'eat'.

  • 'Him' is the object of the coercive verb 'make'.
  • 'Eat' is a bare infinitive complement of 'make'.
  • 'Carrots' is the object of 'eat'.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

5 Answers
0
'Him' is the object of the coercive verb 'make'. 'Eat' is a bare infinitive complement of 'make'. 'Carrots' is the object of 'eat'.
0
That is only one kind of verb that bare infinitives occur with.

'I had them wash my car.
'She let us play outside.'
'We helped her pack.'
etc.
0
Do you consider bare infinitives to be finite verbs? If not, what kind of modifier do the bare infinitive clauses in your examples represent (as direct objects of the main verb) and what do they modify?

Thanks for your help!
0
"She makes him eat carrots."

Hello

Him eat carrots is not a noun clause - it's a bare infinitival subordinate clause functioning as a "catenative" complement to the verb makes.

0
I believe that bare infinitive clauses are considered nominal clauses in a grammar book called "A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language."

Anyway, thanks for your discussion about the matrix clause in the original sentence. That makes sense.

Related Questions