Craig,



It's a book I've had in my library for some time and use quite a bit.  A remarkable piece of research.



Herb



-----Original Message-----

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock

Sent: 2009-03-04 21:23

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: "convinces us that..."?



   I finally got a library copy of Beth Levin's book (English Verb Classes

and Alternations) and she classifies "convince" as a verb of

psychological state, amuse type. "The members of this sub-class of the

psych-verbs describe the bringing about of a change in the

psychological or emotional state. They are transitive verbs whose

object is the experiencer of the emotion and whose subject is the cause

of the change in psychological state."



   It looks like a very rich and interesting book, the kind of text you

might want to have around for reference. I'm already sad that it has a

due date.>



Craig,

>

> I do believe that you have shown that convince has a causative element and

> that it does not exclude the resultive element.  The first is like: “He

> convinced us that we should vote for BO.” The second is like “He

> caused us to believe that BO is the best candidate.” This would clearly

> make the third example redundant: “He caused us to believe that we

> should believe that BO is the best candidate.”  At this point my faith

> is renewed that disciplined paraphrase will bring out the meanings, while

> possibly degrading stylistic niceties.

>

> Bruce

>

> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock

> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:11 AM

> To: [log in to unmask]

> Subject: Re: "convinces us that..."?

>

> Bruce, et. al.,

>    I have been wrestling in my mind with the thought that "convince" may

> be somewhat causative, even in a sentence like the Poe sentence.

>

> "He convinced us to vote for Barack Obama." Definitely causative.

> "He convinced us that Barack Obama is the best candidate." not so sure.

> "He convinced us to believe that Barack obama is the best candidate."

> Seems causative. The meaning seems the same, though it is mildly

> redundant. Does that mean the causative meaning is always there, that the

> clause is perhaps more a result clause than just the content of a

> message?

>    "He told us that Barack Obama is the best candidate" seems to differ

> largely by being causatively neutral.

>

> At about this point, I remind myself that our categories are very rough

> and that we don't want to distort the nature of language by forcing

> everything into a category even when it doesn't seem to fit.

>

> Craig

>

> Bruce Despain wrote:

> I guess I’m on to reply to Scott too.  Consider my reply and apology to

> John; it may help.

>

> He showed us the tree.  subject, verb, indirect object, direct object

> He showed us that the tree was dead.  subject, verb, indirect object,

> clause as direct object

>

> I think these verbs are related but different semantically.  The first

> implies the presence of a tree, whereas the second can be confined to

> mental space.  The indirect object allows a passive: “We were shown that

> the tree was dead.”  I’ll just point out parallels in “He showed the

> tree to us” viz. “He showed it to us that the tree was dead.”  These

> have the prepositional phrase as in some of the next examples.  The

> borderline existence of passives is perhaps pivotal ?“We were shown the

> tree to” viz. ?“We were shown it to, that the tree was dead.”

>

> He proved that the tree was dead.  subject, verb, clause as direct object

> He proved to us that the tree was dead.   subject, verb, prepositional

> phrase, clause as direct object

>

> This is “indirect object” only semantically.   The phrase confines the

> mental activity to certain people.  We might think there no passive for

> it: *”We were proved that the tree was dead.”  However: ?”We were

> proved it to, that the tree was dead.”  This seems to make it arguable

> that the p.p. hides a prepositional object.

>

> He demonstrated that the tree was dead.  subject, verb, clause as direct

> object

> He demonstrated to us that the tree was dead.  subject, verb,

> prepositional phrase, clause as direct object

>

> as with proved.  ??”We were demonstrated it to, that the tree was

> dead.”

>

> He convinced the children to study grammar.  subject, verb, direct object,

> infinitive phrase as a result clause

>

> The children will study grammar.  Result clauses are usually adverbial

> adjuncts.

>

> He convinced us of the truth.  subject, verb, direct object, prepositional

> phrase

>

> The truth is object of the preposition.  This does not seem to be a

> phrasal verb, since the object of the preposition cannot be made subject

> of a passive form of the verb.  But this may be due to the fact that the

> verb already has one direct object.  I take the prepositional phrase as

> adverbial to convince telling the extent.

>

> He convinced us that the tree was dead.  subject, verb, direct object,

> clause as adverb of extent (object of omitted preposition of)

>

> I think the last two sentences are fully parallel in structure

> (analogous).

>

> Bruce

>

> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Scott Woods

> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:37 PM

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: "convinces us that..."?

>

> List,

> The following sentences seem similar, but the verbs aren't

> interchangeable.  Do you agree with my analyses?  Any suggestions?

>

> <He showed us the tree>  Sub, verb, indirect object, direct object

> <He showed us that the tree was dead> Sub, verb, indirect object, clausal

> direct object

> <He proved that the tree was dead> Sub, berb, clausal direct object

> <He proved to us that the tree was dead> Sub, verb, indirect object in

> prepositional phrase, clausal direct object

> <He demonstrated that the tree was dead> Sub, verb, clausal direct object

> <He demonstrated to us that the tree was dead> Subject, verb, indirect

> object in prepositional phrase, clausal direct object

> <He convinced the children to study grammar> subject, verb, direct object,

> infinitive phrase (How would you describe the function of the

> infinitive?)

> <He convinced us of the truth> subject, verb, direct object, prepositional

> phrase? <of> attached to phrasal verb?, What is the function of <the

> truth>?

> <He convinced us that the tree was dead> subject, verb, ?,? Is this

> analogous to the <of the truth> sentence?

> Scott Woods

>

>

> --- On Tue, 3/3/09, John Dews-Alexander

> <[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>

> From: John Dews-Alexander

> <[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: "convinces us that..."?

> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

> Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 3:13 PM

> I had never considered phrasal verbs taking an object in the way that

> prepositional phrases do until Bruce's e-mail.

>

> Bruce, I hope this isn't too general of a request, but could you elaborate

> on your second paragraph? I feel like I've almost grasped the concept

> you're trying to relay, but I'm missing something. Are you saying that the

> indirect object function is not present in this sentence, that it has been

> omitted? (And, perhaps, that it would be present if the sentence had the

> structure, "Someone/something convinces someone of something for/on behalf

> of someone"?) Could you provide an example of what you mean by, "[T]he

> dative....appears with the prepositional object of this same sort"?

>

> I think some of my confusion if stemming from some German interference. In

> German, "to convince someone of something" would be "jemanden (von etwas)

> uberzeugen" (with umlaut on the "u"). The "someone" ("jemanden") is in the

> accusative/direct object case, and the "of something" is in the

> dative/indirect object case. My understanding of your analysis has the "of

> something" as the object of a preposition/phrasal verb but not necessarily

> functioning as the indirect object. Have I muddled your intended meaning?

>

> John

> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Bruce Despain

> <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>>

> wrote:

> Patty and Scott,

>

> I think Patty is on the right track.  The noun clause is the object of the

> prepositional verb “convince of” whereas “us” is in the role of

> direct object.  Something convinces someone of something.  The preposition

> is regularly omitted when its object is a (factive noun) clause.

>

> What is interesting is that the dative (or benefactive) appears with the

> prepositional object of this same sort.  However, the person to whom or

> for whom the particular action of the verb is performed cannot be

> expressed with a  factive noun clause, so the confusion does not occur

> with the loss of the preposition.  The preposition is regularly omitted

> when its object is a pronoun and/or it is placed before the object of the

> verb.  This, of course, is the so-called indirect object, and its surface

> structure is very similar to the former case of an omitted preposition.

>

>

> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

> [mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>]

> On Behalf Of Patricia Lafayllve

> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:56 AM

>

> To:

> [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: Re: "convinces us that..."?

>

> A return question…

>

> If we take the original sentence down a bit, we have <language convinces

> us>.  My eyes read <us> as the direct object, which would then make <that

> a…explanation> the clause that answers the question “What” (as in,

> what does the language convince us).  So…why would we take <us> as the

> indirect object?

>

> -patty

>

> ________________________________

> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

> [mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>]

> On Behalf Of Scott Woods

> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:40 AM

> To:

> [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>

> Subject: "convinces us that..."?

>

>

> List,

>

> I have a few questions about the following sentence:

>

> <Poe's language, however, gradually convinces us that a purely rational

> explanation will not suffice, however neatly it fits the external facts.

> >

>

>

>

> Would you take <us> as the indirect object? Would you take the <that>

> clause after it as the direct object? Is this analogous to <He showed us a

> monkey>? Does <convince> always take a noun clause object when it takes an

> direct object? In <He convinced us>, is <us> now the direct object, that

> is, we were the convinced ones, or is there still an implied clausal

> direct object leaving <us> as an indirect object?

>

>

>

> Thanks,

>

> Scott Woods

>

>

> 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/

> 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/

>

>

> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended

> recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any

> unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you

> are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email

> and destroy all copies of the original message.

> 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/

>

> 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/

>

>

> 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/

>

> 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/

>



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/