2

(1) I proved them to be wrong.

(2) I proved them wrong.

In (1), the objective case them is explained with either Raising or Exceptional Case Marking. The case needs explaining because them is not a semantic argument of the verb proved but a semantic argument of the embedded predicate to be wrong. So the explanation is either that the subject of the embedded predicate is "raised" from the subordinate clause to the main clause, or that the subject of the embedded predicate is exceptionally marked as the object case.

Now, when it comes to sentences like (2), neither explanation can be used, because either Raising or ECM is designed to explain sentences where there is a embedded predicate. Note in (2) that wrong itself wouldn't be considered an embedded predicate for the purpose of Raising or ECM. Nevertheless, (2) does have the objective case them, which is not a semantic argument of the verb proved just as in (1).

How can we explain the objective case them in (2)?

JK2
  • 6,553
  • 6
    Is it any different to "I painted them green" or "I called them stupid"? In other words, object and object complement. I don't know which framework you want it explained within, so I won't attempt to answer. – Stuart F Jul 18 '22 at 13:15
  • 3
    The subject of an infinitive is objective case. If the infinitive marker to and the auxiliary be are deleted by to be-Deletion, that doesn't change the case. Why should it? Especially when Raising then places it in precisely the position in the sentence where an objective pronoun ought to be. If you want to explain its presence, you have a multitude of choices, all operating simultaneously. Of course, you hafta use derivational means to do it, and that's against some religions. – John Lawler Jul 18 '22 at 14:04
  • 3
    I don't see anything worthy of a big fuss. In both 1. and 2. "them" is object of "prove" and thus is in accusative case. In 1. "them" is a raised object. – BillJ Jul 18 '22 at 14:49
  • 1
    @StuartF In your examples, the verb "paint" means "cover (something) with paint, or put paint on (something)", so "them" is a semantic argument of the verb "painted", and using the objective case there needs no explaining. Similarly, "call" means "regard or think of (someone or something) in a certain way", so "them" is a semantic argument of "called", and using the objective case there needs no explaining, either. But in "I proved them wrong", "prove" means "to show that (someone or something) has a particular quality", so "them" is not a semantic argument of "proved". – JK2 Jul 19 '22 at 00:21
  • Where is there a finite clause licensing a pronoun in subject case? We can't use subject case otherwise, which is a marked form reserved for that situation only. – tchrist Jul 26 '22 at 14:50
  • @tchrist We can say I proved they were wrong, which means the same thing as (1) or (2). We can explain (1) with 'raising', but how can we explain (2)?...is the question. – JK2 Jul 27 '22 at 00:58
  • @JK2 This isn’t some syntactic property peculiar to prove, you know. You can just as easily say I considered him eager, I saw him furious, I wanted him fired, I dreamt him happy, I feared him hungry, I needed him gone, I needed him promoted, I needed him laughing, I found him charming, I thought him a beast, I believed him lost, I deemed him worthy, I declared him king, I imagined him winning, I elected him president. – tchrist Jul 27 '22 at 03:07
  • @tchrist I didn't say this is "some syntactic property peculiar to prove", you know. I've just presented prove as an example of this "syntactic property". – JK2 Jul 27 '22 at 03:22
  • @tchrist The same question can be asked for all your examples as well, perhaps except for I dreamt him happy, which I don't think I would use myself. – JK2 Jul 27 '22 at 03:33
  • @JK2 Then consider Julius Caesar, and dreaming him alive today. – tchrist Jul 27 '22 at 03:34
  • @tchrist Somehow, that's fine with me. How strange. Anyway, you get the point, don't you? – JK2 Jul 27 '22 at 03:37
  • How to explain: Them is an object complement? Prove is a factitive verb? The subjective they as in **I proved they wrong* doesn't work? – Tinfoil Hat Jul 31 '22 at 03:43
  • @TinfoilHat It is not them but wrong that is an object complement. The subjective they does work in I proved they were wrong. – JK2 Jul 31 '22 at 22:52
  • Yes, of course, my typo. Them is the object of proved — just like your that-clause is the object of proved in I proved [that] they were wrong. They has nothing to do with this. – Tinfoil Hat Aug 02 '22 at 01:48
  • @TinfoilHat The whole point of the question was that the syntactic object them is not a semantic object of proved. – JK2 Aug 02 '22 at 03:45
  • @RobbieGoodwin If you're familiar with the concepts of Raising and ECM, the question should be clear as day. Normally, linguists use example sentences like (1) when discussing Raising or ECM. But in the literature, rarely do they use sentences like (2) when discussing Raising or ECM. So I was wondering why that is. If sentences like (2) can be explained using Raising/ECM, there must be some linguists who did so. If they cannot be explained using either, I'd like to know how else they can. – JK2 Sep 08 '22 at 00:53
  • @RobbieGoodwin What's that got anything to do with the question? – JK2 Sep 08 '22 at 10:13
  • @RobbieGoodwin It's a fairly simple question, if you understand Raising/ECM. – JK2 Sep 08 '22 at 10:39
  • Thanks and my only point is that it's a much more simple Question than you seem to realise. That's all I'm trying to say, however poorly… – Robbie Goodwin Sep 08 '22 at 17:44
  • @RobbieGoodwin If it's that simple, why don't you take a crack at it yourself? Unless and until you show me your own answer, I can't really buy your claim. – JK2 Sep 09 '22 at 02:29
  • @RobbieGoodwin I'm asking about 'them' because the example sentences in the OP have 'them', not 'you' or 'him'. So I don't know what you're talking about. – JK2 Sep 13 '22 at 03:21
  • @RobbieGoodwin Apparently, you don't know a thing about Raising or ECM, and you don't intend to learn about them. No wonder you don't understand the gist of the question. – JK2 Sep 13 '22 at 03:23

1 Answers1

-2

The OED gives this meaning of "to prove"

5.a. transitive. To show the existence or reality of; to give demonstration or proof of by action; to evince. ... to demonstrate (some quality or condition ...).

The answer to “What did you prove?” is = “I proved [that] they were wrong.” -> “I proved them [to be] wrong.”

“that they were wrong” is a content clause and the object of “proved”. Because it is a clause “they” remains in the subject case as it is the subject of “were”.

However, when “[that] they were wrong” is reduced to “them wrong”, because “they” is no longer the subject of a verb, “them wrong” becomes the object and “they” changes to the object case, i.e. them.

Greybeard
  • 41,737
  • How about "them to be wrong", where there is a verb? – Araucaria - Him Jul 18 '22 at 12:21
  • 2
    Ordinary English. The Devil made me do it. I painted it green. – Yosef Baskin Jul 18 '22 at 12:59
  • 3
    @YosefBaskin Hmm. No, not really. Reason is that in "I painted it green" the word "it" is semantically like the patient argument of paint. Indeed, you could easily just say "He painted it". The same is not true of the non-resultative prove. In "I proved them wrong" it is not the case that "I proved them" and nor is them semantically the patient of "prove" – Araucaria - Him Jul 18 '22 at 14:13
  • "That they were wrong" is complement of "prove", but not object. "Them" is in accusative case because in both examples it is the object of "prove". "Them" is a raised object in 1. – BillJ Jul 18 '22 at 15:06
  • 1
    I don't think 5.a. is the correct definition corresponding to "I proved them wrong". Rather, it's a definition for sentences like "I proved his guilt". – JK2 Jul 19 '22 at 04:22
  • @Araucaria-Nothereanymore. If you say "them to be wrong", then this is preceded by a preposition which will cause "them" rather than "they". – Greybeard Jul 19 '22 at 12:09
  • 2
    @Greybeard I don't understand. Where's the preposition in "I proved them to be wrong"? – Araucaria - Him Jul 19 '22 at 12:13
  • @Araucaria-Nothereanymore. Sorry, your comment lacked context and was ambiguous. I was assuming that "them to be wrong" was a fronting adverbial. – Greybeard Jul 19 '22 at 12:34