Quote:
Originally Posted by Casiopea  In other words, the semantic subjects are different:
Native Americans were systematically displaced (by the US government) in order that room/space could be made available] for white settlers.
Consider now,
The CD had to be listened to (by us) to make sure it worked (by us). < awkward>
How does that sit with you so far?  |
Sorry...it's still not getting through
I'm not sure what you mean by "semantic subject". Can you please define it? I see it mentioned on several Google hits, but I haven't come across a satisfactory definition. Is there a place you can point me to? The reason I'm confused is that, in the treatment of my sentence, you assign the "semantic subject" role in a way that seems arbitrary. In the main clause, the semantic subject is the unstated agent (doer)
the US government. In the second part (which used to be an infinitive phrase but has been rewritten into an embedded noun clause) the "semantic subject" is apparently the receiver,
room. What's wrong with assigning the semantic subject as follows:
Native Americans were systematically displaced (by the US government) in order that room/space could be made available (by the US government) for white settlers.
Then we have both clauses in passive voice, with the agent of each being the "semantic subject". If you accept this analysis, and you agree that it's not awkward, then it follows that
The CD had to be listened to (by us) to make sure it worked (by us).
is also not awkward.
There is a grammar way of looking at this and a semantics way, and I feel like the lines may be getting crossed. What am I missing?
Thanks
