complementary infinitive vs. objective infinitive

[blutoonwithcarrotandnail]

Two rules:

1. Predicate nouns or adjectives after a complementary infinitive are in the nominative

2. Predicate nouns or adjectives after an objective infinitive are in the accusative

Look at the two following sentences:

1. PUER CLARUS ESSE DESEDERANT
2. PUER AMICUM CLARUM ESSE DESEDERANT

Is it my imagination or is ESSE DESEDERANT in each sentence? How can it be the objective infinitive in one and the complementary infinitive in the other unless the word AMICUM is triggering this.





thanks.

[mraig]

It's not clear to me what either of these sentences is trying to say. You have a nominative singular sitting there (puer) with a 3rd person plural verb (desederant, which would mean "they sat down" - I assume you mean "desIderant" - "they want"?)

With a verb like "desiderare" the difference between a complementary & objective infinitive is whether the subject of the INFINITIVE is the same as the subject of the MAIN VERB.

Compare, in English:

They want to be famous. ('Famous' describes the subject of the main verb = Complementary)

They want the boy to be famous ('Famous' describes the subject of the infinitive and NOT the subject of the main verb = objective)

The first sentence would be rendered into Latin as:

desiderant esse clari (clari is in the nom. pl. masc. to match the subject)

The second would be:

desiderant puerum esse clarum (clarum is in the acc. sing. masc. to match its subject, 'puerum')

[blutoonwithcarrotandnail]

1. PUER CLARUS ESSE DESEDERANT
2. PUER AMICUM CLARUM ESSE DESEDERANT

What i am trying to figure out is taken alone is 'ESSE DESEDERANT' a complementary infinitive or a objective infinitive. To me it looks like it is only a complementary infinitive. Can it be both?

thanks.

[bellum paxque]

In esse desiderant, esse is a complementary infinitive. In other words, it completes the meaning of desiderant: what had they desired? They had desired to be...

Note that puer clarus esse desiderant is not grammatical because desiderant is plural whereas the subject, puer, is singular.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by objective infinitive. Sometimes terms aren't very helpful.
-David

[blutoonwithcarrotandnail]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by objective infinitive. Sometimes terms aren't very helpful.

My definition of an objective infinitive is when the following verbs may have an infinitive as object. The list of these is as follows: DESEDERO, VETO, JUBEO, PROHIBEO, DOCEO.

Since DESEDERAT is in this list when it is written ESSE DESEDERAT it could be an objective infinitive or a complementary infinitive.

ESSE DESEDERAT is the same in both sentences in question below. You need to know first whether the sentence is the complementary infinitive or the objective infinitive before you operate the two versions of it. How do you know if the sentence is an objective infinitive or a complementary infinitive?

1. A predicate noun or adjective after a complementary infinitive is in the nominative

Example: PUER CLARUS ESSE DESEDERAT

2. A predicate noun or adjective after an objective infinitive is in the accusative

Example: PUER AMICUM CLARUM ESSE DESEDERAT


There is no reason why sentence 1 or 2 is an objective infinitive and not a complementary infinitive at the same time. There is no reason why one is in the nominative and the other in the accusative.



thanks.

[Michaelyus]

PUER CLARUS ESSE DESEDERAT :
The boy wants to be famous.

Boy ---> famous

Complement

Nominative, but only becuase there's no object.





PUER AMICUM CLARUM ESSE DESEDERAT :
The boy wants [his] friend to be famous

Boy --> (Friend ---> Famous)

Objective

Nominative and accusative, because there is the object that his friend be famous.

[blutoonwithcarrotandnail]

PUER CLARUS ESSE DESEDERAT :


PUER AMICUM CLARUM ESSE DESEDERAT :
The boy wants [his] friend to be famous

Boy --> (Friend ---> Famous)

Objective

Nominative and accusative, because there is the object that his friend be famous.

If the word AMICUM had not been there then ESSE DESEDERAT would have been a complementary infinitive and not an objective infinitive correct?

An objective infinitive must have an object such as AMICUM where the boy wants his friend to be famous?

Is this correct?

thanks.

[blutoonwithcarrotandnail]

Nominative, but only becuase there's no object.

also

Nominative and accusative, because there is the object that his friend be famous.

Noticing something you wrote the use of the terms: object, subject and nominative. I thought i knew what they meant but i think better definition of them is needed to figure this one out



Subject: Subject vs Predicate is what is meant here

The boy threw the ball

The boy = the subject





Nominative: The person who is the point of the sentence

The boy threw the ball at the wall

The boy again is the nominative




Object: If it were the direct object it would be the ball the boy threw





Are these correct? Maybe i dont get what it means by to say:

Objective Infinitive: May have a direct object
Complementary Infinitive: May have a subject in the accusative


thanks.

[blutoonwithcarrotandnail]

Boy ---> famous

Complement


Boy --> (Friend ---> Famous)

Objective

Looking at your logic i thought that an complementary infinitive was called that because one verb (an infinitive) is used to complete the meaning of another. The meaning of complement here seems to have nothing to do with boy->famous triggering itself or boy->(friend->famous) triggering itself. A complementary infinitive is supposed to be complementary because of the two verbs. I'm not seeing anything about the nominative or subject relations triggering this.


Also, my original statements:

1. Predicate nouns or adjectives after a complementary infinitive are in the nominative

etc

seem to be speaking about Predicate nouns. Maybe this has nothing to do with direct objects or nouns in the accusative which are the subject of the infinitive. Maybe it just has to do with predicate nouns.




thanks.

[blutoonwithcarrotandnail]

With a verb like "desiderare" the difference between a complementary & objective infinitive is whether the subject of the INFINITIVE is the same as the subject of the MAIN VERB.

Compare, in English:

They want to be famous. ('Famous' describes the subject of the main verb = Complementary)

They want the boy to be famous ('Famous' describes the subject of the infinitive and NOT the subject of the main verb = objective)

According to what this says above sometimes the subject of the infinitive is not the same as the subject of the main verb.

I am looking at a reply from Bellum Paxque under the message title 'Complementary Verb with a Direct Object' and he says that:

"By its very nature the object goes with the complementary infinitive- not the verb on which the infinitive depends. First for grammatical reasons the complementary infinitive functions like an object for the first verb, liminting and explaining the verb. Second, since most verbs that take complementary infinitives have to do with limiting or explaining the circumstances of the verbal action they arent generally very active in themselves many of them cant take a direct object anyway"


What i seem to be making sense out of this is that the main verb never linkes to the rest of the sentence. It is the complementary infinitive that is linked to the subject or direct object. Is this correct?

There does not seem to be agreement between what bellum paxque and mraig wrote




thanks.

[bellum paxque]

Actually, mraig and I are not saying different things. Granted, we are talking about different things, but our explanations do not contradict each other.

It is very possible that my explanation was not clear.

Let us look again at your sample sentences. I have moved the words around to make the grammatical structure clear.

PUER DESIDERAT ESSE CLARUS
(subject) (verb) (infinitive) (predicate adjective)

PUER DESIDERAT AMICUM ESSE CLARUM
(subject) (verb) (this whole phrase is the object)
(subject) (infinitive) (predicate adjective)

In the first sentence, ESSE is a complementary infinitive.

In the second sentence, ESSE is an objective infinitive, because it is part of a phrase that, taken as a unit, acts as the object of the verb. If you have studied indirect statements, you will see that the second sentence is very similar to those accusative/infinitive constructions.

PUER DICIT AMICUM ESSE CLARUM
the boy says that his friend is famous

What i seem to be making sense out of this is that the main verb never linkes to the rest of the sentence. It is the complementary infinitive that is linked to the subject or direct object. Is this correct?

I meant that the main verb (desiderat) governs the complementary infinitive (esse), which in turn governs the rest of the predicate (clarus). Naturally, the main verb in turn depens upon the subject (puer).

[blutoonwithcarrotandnail]

is what you are saying is that the complementary verb depends upon the main verb. The rest of the sentence depends upon the complementary verb. This is like one giant construction now both verbs together, so you could see it either way who is governing the rest of the sentence since they are both dependent upon one another in link?

[bellum paxque]

Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying.