ATEG Archives

February 2013

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Dick Veit <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:09:56 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2317 bytes) , text/html (4 kB)
Karl rightly points out the ambiguity of "be excited." Both passive and
adjectival readings are possible. That was not the case with the archaic
causative use of "excite." In the sentence "I was excited to consult my
physician when the first symptoms of scrofula appeared," only a passive
reading is possible.

Dick

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Karl Hagen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>  Craig,
>
> I think the examples you have flagged as passive are only ambiguously so.
> That is, in this case you can read "excited" as either a passive participle
> or as a past-participial adjective and there's no definitive way to
> distinguish them.
>
> Notice that you can substitute "become" in for "am" in these sentences,
> meaning that adjectival "excited" can definitely co-occur with the
> by-phrase:
>
> I became excited by your presence.
> I became excited by being near you.
>
> Karl
>
> On 2/27/2013 5:47 AM, Hancock, Craig G wrote:
>
>      I would consider a sentence with “be” plus “excited” passive if it
> includes explicit agency.****
>
>     “I am excited by your presence.”  Passive****
>
>     “I am excited by being near you.”  Passive****
>
>     “I am excited to be near you.” Excited as stative adjective. (More the
> reasons for the state of excitement than the cause.) ****
>
>      Some of the dictionaries I looked at give “arouse” or “rouse” as
> synonym, but I think “arouse” seems to hold onto its verb status a little
> more.****
>
>     “I am aroused by your presence.” (Very natural)****
>
>    “I am aroused to be near you.”  (seems awkward to me.)****
>
>     It’s interesting that “excite” has a technical sense in physics that
> applies to non-sentient entities. If we “excite” something, we increase its
> chemical activity. For the most part, though, the infinitive can’t be
> direct object complement because it doesn’t fit either of those cognitive
> categories.  We can excite a person or thing (in the increased activity
> sense), but I can’t think of ways in which the receiver of the excitement
> might be expressed in infinitive form.****
>
> ** **
>
> Craig
>
>

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/


ATOM RSS1 RSS2