3
"I heard him drop his keys"
I = subject
heard = verb
"him drop his keys." = direct object.
But how can I understand 'drop his keys'?
"I heard him singing in the shower."
Here, "singing in the shower" is an adjectival participle phrase.
"I wanted her TO sing in the shower."
"to sing in the shower" is an infinitive phrase.
But in 'him drop his keys", drop is not a participle, and it's not quite an infinitive with an understood 'to' either (who would say, "I heard him to drop his keys"?) and it's not a truncated phrase like "as he dropped his keys."
"drop his keys' answers the question 'what?" which is a noun sort of question, as opposed to the adverbial "when?", "how?, "where?"" questions, or the how many?", "what kind of?" adjectival questions.
Possible duplicate of Direct object of the verb "want"
– user178049 – 2019-04-05T03:45:05.010@user178049 I disagree. This question isn't about "to want", it's about verbs as direct objects. – user45266 – 2019-04-05T06:19:03.253
1@user45266 "Want" and "hear", in this case, have the same construction and the same kind of complementation. They both take a direct object and a catenative complement. The OP argues that the "him drop his key" is a direct object of the verb and BillJ's answer clearly proves that the premise is wrong because the word string "him drop his key" does not form a constituent. Note that it fails the pseudo-cleft test -- *"What he heard was him drop the key". The direct object here is "him" and the bare-infinitival clause is a catenative complement. – user178049 – 2019-04-05T06:35:05.930
It's a duplicate in the sense that the answer is of the same structure, though I can understand people not 'getting' a bare infinitive catenative complement from reading about a to-infinitive catenative complement. – SamBC – 2019-04-05T14:45:30.837
@user178049 But if the verb were want, it would be "want him to drop his keys". "Heard him drop his keys" is different; it doesn't use the "to". – user45266 – 2019-04-05T14:48:42.063
@user45266 They are both non-finite clauses licenced by the catenative verb. The only difference is a verb of perception such as "hear" licenses a bare infinival clause, not the to-infinival. The non-finite clause is still a catenative complement and the string "him drop his key" still is not a constituent for the reason I have mentioned. – user178049 – 2019-04-05T15:51:08.530
@user178049 You're correct, but I think OP's confusion is on why the "to" is present/absent. – user45266 – 2019-04-05T15:55:05.473
1@user45266 OK. Now the question has become clearer. Thanks to the edit. Patrick Coloney, whether or not the subordinator 'to' is present depends on the verb which licenses the complement. Some verbs such as "see" and "hear" take a bare-infinival clause as a complement. Some verbs such as "decide" and "want" take a to-infinival clause as a complement. Some verbs allow both patterns such as "dare", "know" and "help". – user178049 – 2019-04-05T16:04:43.120
You are not supposed to answer questions in comments. And what is important for ELLers is usage. – Lambie – 2019-04-06T13:16:56.360