THE PREDICATIVE INFINITIVE WITH ACCUSATIVE SUBJECT. 211 
One of the most recent as well as one of the most stimulating discussions of 
our idiom is that by Dr. Jacob Zeitlin, in his above mentioned dissertation (1908). 
On p. 108 we read: u From the very earliest times English, in common with 
other Indo-Germanic languages, employed, after certain verbs of express or 
implied causation (Icetan, forlcetan, hatan, biddan), an accusative with an infini¬ 
tive. . . . Verbs like beodan, don , macian , tcecan, and Iceran, though found 
very rarely with an accusative and infinitive in late Old English, began to em¬ 
ploy the construction more and more frequently in early Middle English, and 
by the opening of the fourteenth century that was the prevailing locution and 
practically the only one employed.” Concerning the idiom after verbs of 
sense perception, on p. 109 we are told: “ This construction is regular in all 
periods of the English language with verbs expressing an immediate sense 
perception, and therefore requires no extensive comment.” Of the idiom 
after verbs of mental perception, we read on p. 78: “ The dividing line between 
verbs of sense and mental perception is not one which can be precisely marked. 
It will be noted that in a number of the citations grouped under sense percep¬ 
tion the verbs have a derivative force which tends to place them in the other 
class. The fact that the same verbs assume the two significations naturally 
involves the extension of the construction in vogue after the primary class to 
the derivative class. But, further than this, there are in Old English a number of 
verbs which are not associated with any idea of sensation and which admit after 
them an accusative with infinitive of a more developed type than any thus far 
noticed.” Finally, concerning the idiom after verbs of declaring, this statement 
is given, p. 99: “ The accusative with infinitive after verbs of declaration is 
found in Old English only in translated documents in imitation of the Latin 
original.” My own view of the construction with this last class of verbs could 
not be better expressed than by the sentence just quoted; and I was delighted 
to find my own view confirmed by the investigation of Dr. Zeitlin, for, although 
his study was published four years ago, my own statistics had been gathered 
and tabulated before the publication of his work. But Dr. Zeitlin’s statement 
on page 99 seems to me to be considerably modified by that on page 110: “ After 
verbs of declaration the early language, in its original literature, shows only 
the faintest beginnings of the construction in the form of an accusative followed 
by a predicate noun, adjective, or participle. The importance of the use of 
the latter forms as predicates is fundamental in the development of the accusa¬ 
tive with infinitive. The frequency with which these predicate forms occur 
in Old English after verbs of mental perception, and their employment after 
verbs of declaration previous to any similar use of the infinitive, may be treated 
as a confirmation of the view that they preceded the accusative with infinitive 
in time, and, in fact, afforded the model 1 * by analogy to which the latter con¬ 
struction was more fully developed. The relation between the accusative 
and the predicate, whatever form that predicate may take, — whether infini¬ 
tive, substantive, adjective, or participle, — is the same. The practical identity 
of the two locutions is illustrated by the fact that it is possible to convert every 
non-infinitive predicate into an infinitive by the introduction of the copula 
to be.” 
1 More guarded is the statement of Professor Gorrell, l. c., p. 475: “ After verbs of saying there is a near 
approach to this construction [infinitive-with-accusative] by the use of the accusative of the substantive and the 
predicate adjective, as Gu., 90, Sas eorSan ealle ssegde Icene under lyfte; similarly BH., 165, 3; Cr., 136.” See 
too, Einenkel, 3 l. c., p. 1077. 
