| Contents |
| 1. Secondary predication |
| 1.1 O-predicates |
| 1.2 S-predicates |
| 2. Object complements |
| 3. Subject complements |
| 4. References |
(1) ellos comen los postres calientes
‘they eat their puddings
hot’
(Habla Culta: Caracas: M4; Corpus del Español)
At first glance, it might seem that the sequence los postres calientes is an NP in which the adjective calientes has an
attributive occurrence, as shown in (2):
(2) ellos comen [NP los postres calientes]
However, this syntactic analysis would only be appropriate if the meaning was ‘they eat the hot puddings’, rather than the meaning implied by the gloss shown in (1). Under the latter interpretation, calientes has an implicitly predicative occurrence, although there is no overt copula (i.e. a verb like ser or estar, both meaning ‘be’). Technically speaking, calientes in (1) occurs as a secondary predicate. Moreover, because this adjective construes with the object los postres, it can be referred to as an O-predicate (where ‘O’ evokes ‘object’).
In theoretical syntax a predicative adjective is assumed to originate as the predicate in a small (i.e. verbless) clause. In the case of example (1), then, calientes is the predicate of an embedded clause that lacks its own verb. From a purely notional standpoint, the subject of this small clause is los postres, as that is the NP of which calientes is predicated. Syntactically, however, los postres is actually the object of the verb comen, implying that the structure involves so-called object control. That is to say, the small clause’s subject should be understood to be a silent pronoun – conventionally designated as PRO – which takes its reference from the object of the matrix clause, viz. los postres (see Chomsky 1981: 111). The structure of (1) can thus be represented as in (3), where PRO is ‘controlled’ by the NP los postres and the containing small clause is an adjunct within the matrix clause:
(3) ellos comen los postres [SC PRO calientes]
An alternative word order exists for (1) whereby the adjective calientes appears between the verb and its object:
(4) ellos comen calientes los postres
This re-ordering can perhaps be regarded as an illustraton of Chomsky’s (2008:160, n. 34) observation that small clauses ‘have an inherent instability, so that one of the two members of the small clause must raise [i.e. move out of the small clause]’. From that perspective, (4) could be analysed as being derived from (3) by calientes moving out of the small class to its surface position, as in (5) below, although it would have to be assumed that the movement was optional (pace Chomsky):
(5) ellos comen calientes los postres [SC PRO calientes]
‘His wrist is broken.’ [lit. ‘He has the wrist broken.’]
(7) Traía la camisa manchada. (Also: Traía manchada la camisa.)
‘His shirt was
stained.’ [lit. ‘He brought his shirt stained.’]
(8) Compraron
la casa muy cara. (Also: Compraron muy cara la casa.)
‘They paid a lot for the house.’ [lit. ‘They bought the house very expensive.’]
1.2 S-predicates
In the examples given so far, the adjective
functioning as a secondary predicate construes with the object of
the verb (and so agrees with it in number and/or gender), but a parallel
construction also exists in which the adjective goes with the verb’s subject:
(9) El público escuchó silencioso.
‘The audience listened in silence.’
(10) Mi padre se casó joven.
‘My father got married young.’
(11) María compró el coche entusiasmada.
‘María bought the car with enthusiasm.’
A secondary predicate that is linked to a subject, such as silencioso in (9), is called an S-predicate (where ‘S’ evokes the term ‘subject’). Again following Chomsky 1981 (p. 111), the S-predicate construction can be analysed in terms of an adjunct small clause whose subject is PRO, as in (12) below:
(12) María compró el coche [SC PRO entusiasmada].
The small clause is roughly equivalent to a gerundial clause such as estando (ella) entusiasmada ‘(she) being enthusiastic’.
2. Object complements
An O-predicate is in many respects similar to what grammarians have traditionally called
an object complement, which is illustrated by the adjective vulgares in (13) below:
(13) La familia Ventura consideraba vulgares a estos mercachifles [. . .]
‘The Ventura family considered these hawkers common’
(José Donoso, Casa de campo; Corpus del Español)
As in the O-predicate construction, the adjective vulgares is implicitly predicative (compare Los mercachifles eran vulgares) and the same flexibility in terms of word order obtains. Thus (14) – replicating the order of (1) – would also be possible:
(14) La familia Ventura consideraba a estos mercachifles vulgares
Unlike in secondary predication, however, the matrix verb in examples like (13)/(14) selects the entire small clause as its complement rather than selecting an object which then controls a PRO subject in the SC, as happens in (1)/(3). In other words, while (13)/(14) relates the Ventura family to a certain proposition, viz. that the hawkers are common, (1)/(3) relates them (the referent of ellos) to puddings, rather than to the proposition that puddings are hot.
This difference in selection becomes more obvious when the small clause itself contains a clause, as in (15) below:
(15) La familia Ventura consideraba [SC obvio que los mercachifles eran vulgares].
‘The Ventura family considered it obvious that the hawkers were common.’
Here the small clause can be viewed as a verbless counterpart to the full clause shown in (16) below, where que los mercachifles eran vulgares is an extraposed subject clause (i.e. a clause that is notionally the subject of the sentence but which is moved to post-copular position).
(16) Era obvio que los mercachifles eran vulgares.
‘It was obvious that the hawkers were common.’
The structural subject of (16) must in fact be deemed to be something like an analogue of the English expletive subject it, although in Spanish this item (whatever it is analysed as being) is never phonologically realized. Furthermore, it is plausible to assume that the phonologically null subject in (16) is retained as the subject in the corresponding small clause in (15), given that this is exactly what happens with the overt expletive it in the analogous English construction:
(17) It is obvious that . . . → We consider it obvious that . . .
Now the key point about expletive subjects is that they can only be subjects, i.e. they cannot additionally be selected as the object of a matrix verb. Thus while the phonologically null item that can be posited as the structural subject of (16) can be posited as having the same role in constructions such as parece que . . . ‘it seems that . . .’ and hace seis meses que . . . ‘It's been six months since . . .’, there is no known verb that selects this null item as its object (and analogous remarks apply to English it).
Thus the structure of (15) can only be as in (18), where φ represents the phonologically null subject assumed for (16), and not as in (19):
(18) La familia Ventura consideraba [SC φ obvio que los mercachifles eran vulgares].
‘The Ventura family considered it obvious that the hawkers were common.’
(19) La familia Ventura consideraba φ [SC PRO obvio que los mercachifles eran vulgares].
‘The Ventura family considered it obvious that the hawkers were common.’
A conclusion is accordingly forced whereby consideraba in (15) selects the entire SC as its complement and the default assumption is that the same applies to (13)/(14). Therefore (14) should be anlysed as in (20) below, implying that (13) is derived as in (21), with the adjective vulgares moving out of its base position to a position immediately to the right of the verb, analogously to calientes in (4)/(5).
(20) La familia Ventura consideraba [SC a estos mercachifles vulgares]
(21) La familia Ventura consideraba vulgares [SC a estos mercachifles vulgares]
In a sense, then, the term ‘object complement’ is slightly misleading, as the apparent object is in reality the subject of the small clause rather than the object of the main verb. For convenience, though, I will continue to use this descriptive label for the type of construction illustrated in (13)/(14).
The analysis motivated for (13)/(14) can perhaps be extended to examples such as the following, modulo the presence of a preposition (por or de, corresponding to English as) immediately before the adjective functioning as object complement:
(22) Toman por vagos [SC a los trabajadores por vagos].
‘They regard the workers as lazy.’
(23) Calificó de corruptos [SC a los ministros de corruptos].
‘He/She described the ministers as corrupt.’
Like considerar discussed above, both tomar and calificar can construe with a small clause containing an expraposed subject clause, as in (24) and (25) below.
(24) Toman [SC por obvio que la situación es insostenible].
‘They regard it as obvious that the situation is unsustainable.’
(25) Calificó [SC de obvio que la situación es insostenible].
‘He/She described it as obvious that the situation is unsustainable.’
The same argument as was used for (15) can be adduced to show that tomar and calificar select the entire SC as their complement, rather than a null object. In other words, the structure of (24), say, must be as in (26) and not as in (27):
(26) Toman por obvio que la situación es insostenible].
(27) Toman φ [SC PRO por obvio que la situación es insostenible].
3. Subject complements
A further construction highlighted by grammarians is that of the so-called subject complement, illustrated in (28):
The structural relations here are by no means obvious, but a ‘subject raising’ analysis, implying that saber in this usage is like English seem, is not without plausibility (particularly given that the sequence Sabían las cicatrices saladas would be a viable alternative word order in Spanish):
(29) las cicatrices sabían [SC las cicatrices saladas]
This analysis could then be extended to examples like (30), for which the alternative verb–subject–predicate word order is also available:
(30) María peca [SC María de obsesiva].
‘María
is a bit on the obsessive side.’
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Chomsky, Noam. 2008. ‘On Phases.’ In Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero and María Luisa Zubizarreta (eds), Foundational issues in linguistic theory (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp 133–66.