0
JungKim Posted 9 years ago
Grammar
we have something to draw us in
This is from a book review titled "Diary of a Body by Daniel Pennac -- what it means to be human":
In this structure, I'm not sure how to understand "to draw us in". It seems that the implied subject of the verb "draw" is "we". Then, why it isn't "draw ourselves in" instead of "draw us in"?
The boldfaced portion has the structure of "we have something to draw us in".
And try as he might to stay true to his stated aims for this diary, he can't help revealing the things that matter to him. He may claim, for example, that the real matter of his attention is the stickiness of turds in the toilet bowl, but what we take from his account is somewhat different. Because vitally -- and this is how the book works on a reader -- we have not merely a collection of physiological phenomena but a character, a voice, to draw us in; a voice every bit as well realised and appealing in Alyson Waters's translation as in Pennac's French.
In this structure, I'm not sure how to understand "to draw us in". It seems that the implied subject of the verb "draw" is "we". Then, why it isn't "draw ourselves in" instead of "draw us in"?
Top answer
JungKim It seems that the implied subject of the verb "draw" is "we". No; it is 'a character, a voice'.
- JungKim It seems that the implied subject of the verb "draw" is "we".
- No; it is 'a character, a voice'.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
16 Answers
0
JungKimIt seems that the implied subject of the verb "draw" is "we".No; it is 'a character, a voice'.
00
If the implied subject is 'a character, a voice', why is it "to draw us in", instead of "draw us in" or "drawing us in"?
Or can it be either "draw us in" or "drawing us in" instead of "to draw us in"?
Or can it be either "draw us in" or "drawing us in" instead of "to draw us in"?
00
It is the 'have' of possession and the 'to'-infinitive of potentiality.
00
So, does it mean "we have not merely a collection of physiological phenomena but a character, a voice, that can draw us in"?
00
We have not merely a collection of physiological phenomena but [the author's] character, voice, that can draw us in.
00
I don't know why you should change "a character" to "the author's character".
Let's make that "a voice" to make it simpler.
And I guess my question boils down to whether you can easily mean "We have a voice that can draw us in" by saying "We have a voice to draw us in."
I think I'm not really familiar with this latter type of structure.
Could you give me some ex
Let's make that "a voice" to make it simpler.
And I guess my question boils down to whether you can easily mean "We have a voice that can draw us in" by saying "We have a voice to draw us in."
I think I'm not really familiar with this latter type of structure.
Could you give me some ex
00
JungKimmy question boils down to whether you can easily mean "We have a voice that can draw us in" by saying "We have a voice to draw us in."Yes, you can. No examples spring to mind, Perhaps it is earlier in the day for some other member.
00
I just came up with this sentence: I always have someone at EnglishForward.com to help me out with my stupid grammar questions.
Does this work?
Does this work?
00
Good morning. Yes, that is fine if it matches your criterion.
00
Thanks for confirming.
Now I understand that the original works and what it means.
In the original, would it have been possible to use a bare infinitive or an ing-form instead of the to-infinitive?
...but what we take from his account is somewhat different. Because vitally -- and this is how the book works on a reader -- we have not merely a collection of physiologica
Now I understand that the original works and what it means.
In the original, would it have been possible to use a bare infinitive or an ing-form instead of the to-infinitive?
...but what we take from his account is somewhat different. Because vitally -- and this is how the book works on a reader -- we have not merely a collection of physiologica
0
Related Questions