1

Consider the following four sentences:

  1. She doesn't like that I talked rudely to her.
  2. She doesn't like I talking rudely to her.
  3. She doesn't like my talking rudely to her.
  4. She doesn't like me talking rudely to her.

My questions:

  • Which of the above sentences are grammatical?
  • I know "that I talked rudely to her" is a noun clause. What is "sb. doing sth." technically called when using as an object?
Tom
  • 111

2 Answers2

1

1 and 4 are grammatical. In sentence #1, "that I talked rudely her" is a noun clause being used as the direct object of "like". In sentence #4, "talking rudely to her" is a participle phrase modifying "me".

I think #3 is grammatical, but not so common in my variety of English (midwestern US). I think in that case, "talking rudely to her" would be a gerund phrase used as a direct object, and "my" would be modifying that gerund phrase.

awe lotta
  • 140
1

[1] *She doesn't like [that I talked rudely to her].

[2] *She doesn't like [I talking rudely to her].

[3] She doesn't like [my talking rudely to her].

[4] She doesn't like [me talking rudely to her].

Preliminary point: the bracketed elements in [2]-[4] are not objects and the corresponding element in [1] is not a so-called 'noun clause'.

[1] is ungrammatical because the verb "like" does not license a content clause on its own. It requires "it", as in She doesn't like it that I talked rudely to her.

[2] is ungrammatical. Non-finite subordinate clauses take either genitive or accusative case subjects, but not nominative case.

In [3] and [4] the bracketed elements are subordinate clauses functioning as complement of "like". "My/me" is the subject and "talking rudely to her" is the predicate VP. The difference between the two is one of style. [3] has the more formal genitive case "my" as subject.

BillJ
  • 12,832
  • The analysis of [4] is slightly over-simplified. Strictly speaking, "me" is the raised object of "like" and only the understood (semantic) subject of "talking". – BillJ Oct 30 '22 at 09:56
  • You're wrong. "My" can most certainly function as an NP subject. Non-finite clauses take either accusative (ex 4) or genitive (ex 3) subjects. See J Lawler's detailed answer to a similar question link – BillJ Oct 31 '22 at 10:41
  • 2
    Downvoted. Nothing is wrong with (1). While some grammarians may wrongly say that "like" does not license a content clause on its own — who says this??? — English speakers have been using this construction for centuries. The OED has, among other examples: (1634) I like that you distill them in copper vessells, for you neede not feare that the oyle which is distilled by them will contract an ill quality from the copper. (1822) I wadna like that we were trowed to be corbie messengers. (1983) I like that you're painting something else besides birds. (2010) He liked that I was artistic. – Peter Shor Oct 31 '22 at 12:45
  • What I said is correct. You may find examples of it, but strictly speaking it's ungrammatical in Standard English. It's good advice to learners. Btw, go downvote John Lawler for his concurrence with me about genitive "my" as a subject. – BillJ Oct 31 '22 at 12:52
  • Who says it's ungrammatical in standard English? Can you give me a reference? The OED doesn't flag this construction as nonstandard, the way they do for ain't. – Peter Shor Oct 31 '22 at 13:02
  • 3
    @PeterShor I can give you a venerable reference: H&P/CGEL p.963 state "Like [...] does not license a content clause on its own." However, the truth of the matter is that there is a very marked US/rest of world split on this. COCA gives 200+ hits for I like that _pp, where '_pp' is personal pronoun. In contrast, the BNC gives only 1, and that text is gibberish. So BillJ has both his grammaticality bone and his references all lined up well, but there's no doubt that it's grammatical for some US speakers. The rest of us require an extraposition there: I like it* that ...* – Araucaria - Him Oct 31 '22 at 14:28