the command had when it is followed by an infinitive

[donnach]

1. I had him leave.

2. I asked him to leave.

In sentence #1, is leave an infinitive without the particle to?

What function does leave (in sentence #1) and to leave (in sentence #2) serve? Object complement?

Thanks!

[Mylanguageclick]

Have, make, and get are often used to indicate that one person has the power to force another to do something.
Have and make are followed by a noun or pronoun and an infinitive without to.
He had/made the mechanic fix the car.
Get is followed by a noun or pronoun and a to-infinitive.
He got the mechanic to fix the car.
Have/Get someone do something = Organise/arrange for someone to do something.

Regards.

[5jj]

"Have", "make", and "get" are often used to indicate that one person has the power to force another to do something.
"Have" and "make" are followed by a noun or pronoun and an infinitive without "to":

He had/made the mechanic fix the car.

"Get" is followed by a noun or pronoun and a to-infinitive:

He got the mechanic to fix the car.

"Have/Get someone do something" = Organise/arrange for someone to do something.

Mylanguageclick,
Your answer is correct, but it would be easier to read if you marked out the words you are talking about, and the example sentences, in some way. I have given one suggestion above. Here is another:

Have, make, and get are often used to indicate that one person has the power to force another to do something.
Have and make are followed by a noun or pronoun and an infinitive without to:

"He had/made the mechanic fix the car."

Get is followed by a noun or pronoun and a to-infinitive:
.
"He got the mechanic to fix the car."

[BobK]

"Have", "make", and "get" are often used to indicate that one person has the power to force another to do something.
"Have" and "make" are followed by a noun or pronoun and an infinitive without "to"..."

This is sometimes called a 'bare infinitive'. When I first dipped my toes in the sea of ELT, this bothered me. Having studied several languages in which the infinitive was always marked by an ending - -are, -ar, -er, -en etc, I assumed the word 'infinitive' implied the 'to' - I wasn't even aware I was assuming it - it had just always been true. I suddenly had to start referring to 'to-infinitives' and 'bare infinitives'.

b

[Mylanguageclick]

Fivejedjon you are right, thanks for your suggestion.
Regards.

[donnach]

Thanks for the answers. :)

What function does the infinitive leave (or to leave in sentence #2) serve? Are they object complements?

[5jj]

What function does the infinitive leave (or to leave in sentence #2) serve? Are they object complements?

I am sure somebody will turn up an answer your question - I can't. I just wonder why it is so important to have a label for this?

I survived my long teaching experience with references to verb + bare infinitive, verb + to-infinitive, verb + gerund, verb + object + bare infinitive, etc.

ps - at least this bumps your post.

[donnach]

It's easier for me to have labels. It makes it easier for me to understand the rules of English. And it also makes it easier for me to explain to ELL students how English works using rules that have labeled items in those rules. But mainly I ask for me; it satisfies my personal learning style.

[Mylanguageclick]

In my opinion, the infinitive leave (or to leave in sentence #2) is functioning as an indirect object in the sentence.

Regards.

[TheParser]

1. I had him leave.

2. I asked him to leave.

In sentence #1, is leave an infinitive without the particle to?

What function does leave (in sentence #1) and to leave (in sentence #2) serve? Object complement?

Thanks!

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


(1) The books do not agree. I am happy to tell you the opinions of two very

good grammar books (for ordinary people like me): A Grammar of Present-Day

English (by Pence & Emery)and Descriptive English Grammar (by House and

Harman).


(2) He asked me to go


(a) Analysis #1: Me and to go are direct objects of asked. [Personally, I cannot

understand this reasoning.]

(b) Analysis #2: Me to go is an infinitive clause (or phrase) that is the direct

object of asked. Me is the subject of the infinitive to go. [Personally, I like this.]

(c) Analysis #3: Me is the direct object of asked; to go is the objective complement

of me.

(3) He made me go (here we are dealing with an infintive that does not have a "to,"

such as your "I had him leave").

(a) Analysis #1: Me is the direct object of made; go is the infinitive clause/phrase

that is the objective complement of me.

(b) Analysis #2: Me go is an infinitive clause/phrase that is the direct object of

made; me is the subject of the infinitive go. [When a person diagrams a sentence

of this kind, s/he diagrams it as: me (to) go. That is, one does not say or write the

word "to," but -- nevertheless -- it is there in theory.] I prefer Analysis #2.

P.S. If you go to the diagramming forum of usingenglish. com, they will be

delighted to draw a Reed-Kellogg diagram of any sentence that you give them.

Although many people nowadays ridicule Reed-Kellogg as "old-fashioned" and

"useless," many of us find that it gives us a perfect "picture" of a sentence.