Monocomplementive, tran-sit I vc The railings

§ 2. The infinitive is the non-finite form of the verb which combines the properties of the verb with those of the noun, serving as the verbal name of a process. By virtue of its gen­eral process-naming function, the infinitive should be consid­ered as the head-form of the whole paradigm of the verb. In this quality it can be likened to the nominative case of the noun in languages having a normally developed noun declen­sion, as, for instance, Russian. It is not by chance that A. A. Shakhmatov called the infinitive the "verbal nomina­tive". With the English infinitive, its role of the verbal par­adigmatic head-form is supported by the fact that, as has been stated before, it represents the actual derivation base for all the forms of regular verbs.
The infinitive is used in three fundamentally different types of functions: first, as a notional, self-positional syntac­tic part of the sentence; second, as the notional constituent of a complex verbal predicate built up around a predicator verb; third, as the notional constituent of a finite conjugation form of the verb. The first use is grammatically "free", the second is grammatically "half-free", the third is grammati­cally "bound'^:
The dual verbal-nominal meaning of the infinitive is expressed in full measure in its free, independent use. It is in this use that the infinitive denotes the corresponding proc­ess in an abstract, substance-like presentation. This can easily be tested by question-transformations. Cf.:
Do you really mean to go away and leave me here alone? -> What do you really mean? It made her proud sometimes to toy with the idea. —> What made her proud sometimes?
The combinability of the infinitive also reflects its dual semantic nature, in accord with which we distinguish between its verb-type and noun-type connections. The verb-type com­binability of the infinitive is displayed in its combining, first, with nouns expressing the object of the action; second, with nouns expressing the subject of the action; third, with modifying adverbs; fourth, with predicator verbs of semi-
105

i

functional nature forming a verbal predicate; fifth, with aux­iliary finite verbs (word-morphemes) in the analytical lorrns of the verb. The noun-type combinability of the infinitive is displayed in its combining, first, with finite notional verbs as the object of the action; second, with finite notional verbs as the subject of the action.
The self-positional infinitive, in due syntactic arrange­ments, performs the functions of all types of notional sen­tence-parts, i. e. the subject, the object, the predicative, the attribute, the adverbial modifier. Cf.:
_> 2_
To meet the head of the administration and not to speak to him about your predicament was unwise, to say the least of it. (Infinitive subject position) The chief arranged to re­ceive the foreign delegation in the afternoon. (Infinitive object position) The parents' wish had always been to see their eld­est son the continuator of their joint scientific work. (Infin­itive predicative position) Here again we are faced with a plot to overthrow the legitimately elected government of the republic. (Infinitive attributive position) Helen was far too worried to listen to the remonstrances. (Infinitive adverbial position)
If the infinitive in free use has its own subject, different from that of the governing construction, it is introduced by the preposition-particle for. The whole infinitive construction of this type is traditionally called the "for-to infinitive phrase". Cf.: For that shy-looking young man to have stated his purpose so boldly — incredible!
The prepositional introduction of the inner subject in the English infinitive phrase is analogous to the preposition-al-casal introduction of the same in the Russian infinitive phrase (i.e. either with the help of the genitive-governing prepo­sition djiH, or with the help of the dative case of the noun). Cf.: Rah nac ouenb eaotcno nonnmb npHpo^y no^o6Hbix coot-
BeTCTBHH.
With some transitive verbs (of physical perceptions, men­tal activity, declaration, compulsion, permission, etc.) the infinitive is used in the semi-predicative constructions of the complex object and complex subject, the latter being the passive counterparts of the former. Cf.:
We have never heard Charlie play his violin. —> Charlie has never been heard to play his violin. The members of the committee expected him to speak against the suggested re-
106
solution. -> He was expected by the members of the commit­tee to speak against the suggested resolution.
Due to the intersecting character of joining with the gov­erning predicative construction, the subject of the infinitive in such complexes, naturally, has no introductory prepo­sition-particle.
The English infinitive exists in two presentation forms. One of them, characteristic of the free uses of the infinitive, is distinguished by the pre-positional marker to. This form is called traditionally the "to-infinitive", or in more recent linguistic works, the "marked infinitive". The other form, characteristic of the bound uses of the infinitive, does not employ the marker to, thereby presenting the infinitive in the shape of the pure verb stem, which in modern interpreta­tion is understood as the zero-suffixed form. This form is called traditionally the "bare infinitive", or in more recent linguistic works, respectively, the "unmarked infinitive".
The infinitive marker to is a word-morpheme, i.e. a spe­cial formal particle analogous, mutatis mutandis, to other auxiliary elements in the English grammatical structure. Its only function is to build up and identify the infinitive form as such. As is the case with the other analytical markers, the particle to can be used in an isolated position to repre­sent the whole corresponding construction syntagmatically zeroed in the text. Cf.: You are welcome to acquaint your­self with any of the documents if you want to.
Like other analytical markers, it can also be separated from its notional, i.e. infinitive part by a word or a phrase, usually of adverbial nature, forming the so-called "split infinitive". Cf.: My task is not to accuse or acquit; my task it to thoroughly investigate, to clearly define, and to consist­ently systematize the facts.
Thus, the marked infinitive presents just another case of an analytical grammatical form. The use or non-use of the infinitive marker depends on the verbal environment of the infinitive. Namely, the unmarked infinitive is used, besides the various analytical forms, with modal verbs (except the modals ought and used), with verbs of physical perceptions, with the verbs let, bid, make, help (with the latter — option­ally), with the verb know in the sense of "experience", with a few verbal phrases of modal nature (had better, would rath­er, would have, etc.), with the relative-inducive why. All these uses are detailed in practical grammar books.
107
The infinitive is a categorially changeable form. It dis­tinguishes the three grammatical categories sharing them with the finite verb, namely, the aspective category of develop­ment (continuous in opposition), the aspective category of retrospective coordination (perfect in opposition), the cat­egory of voice (passive in opposition). Consequently, the categorial paradigm of the infinitive of the objective verb includes eight forms: the indefinite active, the continuous active, the perfect active, the perfect continuous active; the indefinite passive, the continuous passive, the perfect passive, the perfect continuous passive. E.g.: to take — to be taking
— to have taken — to have been taking; to be taken —to
be being taken — to have been taken — to have been being
taken.
The infinitive paradigm of the non-objective verb, cor­respondingly, includes four forms. E.g.: to go — to be going
— to have gone — to have been going.
The continuous and perfect continuous passive can only be used occasionally, with a strong stylistic colouring. But they underlie the corresponding finite verb forms. It is the indefinite infinitive that constitues the head-form of the verbal paradigm.