Английского

§ 4. Semi-complex sentences of object-sharing, as different from 
those of subject-sharing, are built up of two base sentences over-
lapping round the word performing different functions in them: in 
the matrix sentence it is the object, in the insert sentence it is the 
subject. The complicator expansion of such sentences is commonly 
called the "complex object". E.g.: 
We saw him.-\-He approached us. → We saw him approach us 
(approaching us). They painted the fence.-\-The fence was (be-
came) green. → They painted the fence green. 
Some dominant verbs of such constructions are not used in the 
same essential meaning outside the constructions, in particular, 
some causative verbs, verbs of liking and disliking, etc. Cf.: *I 
made him.+He obeyed. ~» I made him obey. 
This fact, naturally, reflects a very close unity of the constituents of 
such constructions, but, in our opinion, it can't be looked upon as 
excluding the constructions from 

---

344
the syntactic subsystem in question; rather, the subsystem should 
be divided into the subsets of "free" object-sharing and "bound" 
object-sharing. 
The adjunct to the shared object is expressed by an infinitive, a 
present or past participle, an adjective, a noun, depending on the 
structural type of the insert sentence (namely, on its being verbal or 
nominal). 
As is seen from the above, the paradigmatic (derivational) explana-
tion of the sentence with a "complex object" saves much descrip-
tive space and, which is far more important, is at once generalising 
and practicable.* As for the relations between the two connected 
events expressed by the object-sharing sentence, they are of the 
three basic types: first, relations of simultaneity in the same place; 
second, relations of cause and result; third, relations of mental atti-
tude towards the event (events thought of, spoken of, wished for, 
liked or disliked, etc.). All these types of relations can be expli-
cated by the corresponding transformations of the semi-complex 
sentences into pleni-complex sentences. 
Simultaneity in the same place is expressed by constructions with 
dominant verbs of perceptions (see, hear, feel, smell, etc.). E.g.: 
He felt the morning breeze gently touching his face. → He felt the 
morning breeze as it was gently touching his lace. I never heard the 
word pronounced like that. → I never heard the word as it was 
pronounced like that. 
Cause and result relations are rendered by constructions with 
dominant causative verbs taking three types of complex objects: an 
unmarked infinitival complex object (the verbs make, let, get, have, 
help); a nounal or adjectival complex object (the verbs call, ap-
point, keep, paint, etc.); a participial complex object (the verbs set, 
send, keep, etc.). Cf.: 
I helped Jo find the photo. → I helped Jo so that he found the 
photo. The cook beat the meat soft. —» The cook beat the meat so 
that it was (became) soft. 
Different mental presentations of the complicator event are ef-
fected, respectively, by verbs of mental perceptions and thinking 
(think, believe, expect, find, etc.); verbs of speech 
* Cf. the classical "syntagmatic" explanation of constructions with 
complex objects in the cited 13. A. llyish's book, p. 257 ff.

---

345
(tell, ask, report, announce, etc.); verbs of wish; verbs of liking and 
disliking. Cf.: 
You will find many things strange here. → You will find that 
many things are strange here. I didn't mean my words to hurt you. 
→ I didn't mean that my words should hurt you. 
Semi-complex sentences of the object-sharing type, as we have 
stated above, are closely related to sentences of the subject-sharing 
type. Structurally this is expressed in the fact that they can be 
transformed into the passive, their passive counterparts forming the 
corresponding subject-sharing constructions. Cf.: 
We watched the plane disappear behind the distant clouds. → The 
plane was watched to disappear behind the distant clouds. They 
washed the floor clean. → The floor was washed clean. 
Between the two series of constructions, i.e. active and passive, 
equivalence of the event-relations is observed, so that the differ-
ence in their basic meaning is inherent in the difference between 
the verbal active and passive as such.