Owen—Hybrid Parts of Speech. 
163 
If such explanation be accepted, it still holds true—and this 
is all I need to establish—that the form assumed by a possible 
subject of the infinitive, is an unreliable guide to the structure 
of thought. In particular, the accusative form of such a possi¬ 
ble subject should not betray me into overhastily regarding it 
as the intended object of a more central verb. 37 
How they operate as verbs. 
In the first place they forego assertion, which is but an¬ 
other form of saying that the lateral thoughts which they in 
verbal function cooperate in expressing, are by no means judg¬ 
ments, but conceptions (see pages 121-122). 
Thus, comparing 
(1) “I have seen an express train strike a freight,” and 
(2) “I have seen a collision,” 
I find that in (1) the expanded indication of what I have 
seen is, in its unassertedness, exactly on a par with the unex¬ 
panded indication effected in (2) by the word Collision.” 38 
37 in this connection an interesting variant of infinitive usage may be 
worth a passing comment. To illustrate, “To exercise would be good 
for him”, in which no doubt a subject for “To exercise” may be found 
in a “he” (or “him”) understood, though such a thinking in of a sub¬ 
ject is so needless as presumably to be neglected. 
The like may be assumed of the rearranged “It would be good for 
him to exercise.” 
By further change the latter becomes “For him to exercise would be 
good” or “a good thing”, in which the recognition of “for him” as an 
associate of “good,” may persist—or not. 
On the other hand, in such an expression as “For him to exert him¬ 
self is not to be expected,” “For him” can hardly be regarded as as¬ 
sociated with the whole or any part of “is not to be expected.” Thought 
appears to have been reconstructed, “him” becoming subject of “to 
exert,” and the “For” now operating on “him to exert himself” much as 
“to,” as commonly, operates on “exert”—that is, as sign that in some 
way the following phrase is to take a substantive position in the syntax 
of the expressional total, the preposition being regularly followed by 
what is substantively apprehended. 
38 That I might desire to express belief in the expanded indication 
offered by (1), and that linguistic means of doing so may be developed, 
I do not for a moment doubt. But obviously, were I to lay the burden 
of my belief on whatever could endure it, I should quickly overburden 
you. Such utterances as “If I (whom I believe to exist) were you 
(whom I believe to exist), I (whom again I believe to exist) should 
take better care of myself (whom a third time I believe to exist)” 
are so intolerable, that their non-occurrence may as well be posed as 
their impracticability. One assertion in the exhibition of one expres- 
