§4 Predicative complements 73In [i] we have preposing of a complement: the canonical version is She gave him
everything else. The [a] version is completely acceptable, the [b] version rare and
marginal, at least for many speakers.
In [ii] we have a type of interrogative clause differing from those considered so
far in that it begins with an interrogative word. In [a] what is direct object (cf. She
bought him some shoes), and in [b] who is indirect object (cf. She bought To m
these shoes). The difference in acceptability in this pair is very sharp.
The bracketed clauses in [iii] are relative clauses. Which is direct object (cf.
She had given him the gifts), while whom is indirect object (cf. She had given
everyone gifts). Construction [b] is not so bad here, but still considerably less
common and natural than [ a].
In [iv] we have a type of construction not encountered so far. They are exclama
tive clauses, with a fronted exclamative phrase. Again the fronted phrase in [a] is
direct object (cf. He gave them a lot of work) and indirect object in [b] (cf. He
gave a lot of them work). This construction is one where the fronted indirect
object seems particularly bad.(^4) Predicative complements
The next kind of dependent of the verb we consider is the predicative
complement (PC in labels of example displays). A predicative complement com
monly has the form of an NP, and in that case it contrasts directly with an object ( 0 ).
Look at these [a] and [b] pairs:
[18] PC
a. Stacy was a good s/l.eaker.
ii a. Lee became a friend o[mine.
b.
b.
Stacy
Lee
o
fo und a good s/l.eaker.
insulted a friend o[mine.
There is a sharp semantic distinction in elementary examples of this kind. The
object NPs refer to PARTICIPANTS in the situation: in each of [ib] and [iib] there are
two people involved. The predicative NPs, however, do not refer to participants like
this. There is only a single person involved in the [a] examples, the one referred to
by the subject NP. The predicative complement NP denotes a PROPERTY that is
ascribed to this person.
PCs are most clearly illustrated by examples like [18ia]. The verb be here has
basically no semantic content. It is quite common in other languages for the verb to
be completely missing in this kind of construction. The most important thing that be
does in this example is to carry the preterite tense inflection that indicates reference
to past time. The meaning of the clause is really just that Stacy spoke in an enter
taining manner. So although a good speaker is syntactically an NP complement, it
is semantically comparable to a predicate like spoke well. This is the basis for the