Diagramming "let."

In the "Ask a Teacher" forum, we have been having a most interesting

discussion about this sentence:

Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

Would you please Reed-Kellogg it?

A MILLION thanks!!!

http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/4896/stone.gif

On a scale extendig from true auxiliaries to true main verbs are catenatives, the neighbors of main verbs. I suspect 'let' is one of the boys. Let us see some tests:

1. It has a meaning related to modality or aspect. :tick:
2. It satisfies the "independence of subject" criterion:

Let me go. :tick:
Let it flow. :tick:

3. Catenative constructions are in no way syntactically related to transitive
verb constructions in which the verb is followed by a direct object or
prepositional object.

Let him cast the stone.
Allow him to cast the stone.
Let him the casting of stone. :cross:
Allow him the casting of stone. :tick:

"Let" is even less catenative than "allow".


Quirk et. al. says:
Let them go! -- "let = pragmatic particle of imperative mood
May you be happy. -- "may" = pragmatic particle of optative mood

Same syntax:
Let him (to) cast the stone.
Allow him to cast the stone.

SVOC --> complex transitive verb.

I fully agree with Frank's diagram. :cheers:

So many big words!

I just learned that "Let..." used like that is an example of the imperative, with a "you" understood, as in a command.

The objective complement is not something one automatically looks for.

Thanks, Corum.

Thank you very much, gentlemen, for your replies.