# I think he is or I think him



## Sarp84224

Is “I think him” grammatically correct? I have read that “think” is both an intransitive verb and a transitive berb

Q. Who is the best person to do the job?

1. I think he is the best person for the job.
2. I think him is the best person for the job.

I really can’t think of a sentence when the word “think” can be used with an object pronoun. Is it grammatically correct?


----------



## grassy

"Think" takes a that-clause, the subject of which has to be "he", not "him".


----------



## dojibear

"I think him" is correct.
"I think him is" is not correct.

The phrase "I think" has an optional "that" between it and a sentence that follows:

Q. Who is the best person to do the job?
1. I think (that) he is the best person for the job.   
2. I think (that) him is the best person for the job. 



Sarp84224 said:


> I really can’t think of a sentence when the word “think” can be used with an object pronoun.



3. I think him to be the best person for the job. 

The sentence is correct, but is not very idiomatic in AE.


----------



## Sarp84224

dojibear said:


> "I think him" is correct.
> "I think him is" is not correct.
> 
> The phrase "I think" has an optional "that" between it and a sentence that follows:
> 
> Q. Who is the best person to do the job?
> 1. I think (that) he is the best person for the job.
> 2. I think (that) him is the best person for the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 3. I think him to be the best person for the job.
> 
> The sentence is correct, but is not very idiomatic in AE.



But, I thought the verb “to be” takes a subject pronoun so shouldn’t it be, “I think he is (a variant of “to be”) the best for the job”?

Is the pronoun “he” or “him” agreeing with the verb “think” or “is/to be”?


----------



## grassy

"I think + object pronoun + to be" is a different construction from "I think + that-clause".

I suggest you don't overanalyze it and look for logic in it at all cost. Just learn how to say it right and you'll be fine.


----------



## Sarp84224

grassy said:


> "I think + object pronoun + to be" is a different construction from "I think + that-clause".
> 
> I suggest you don't overanalyze it and look for logic in it at all cost. Just learn how to say it right and you'll be fine.



I (subject pronoun) + think (verb) are agreeing with each other.

Therefore, “he” must be the correct pronoun to use because it’s agreeing with the verb “is”.



dojibear said:


> "I think him" is correct.
> "I think him is" is not correct.
> 
> The phrase "I think" has an optional "that" between it and a sentence that follows:
> 
> Q. Who is the best person to do the job?
> 1. I think (that) he is the best person for the job.
> 2. I think (that) him is the best person for the job.
> 
> 
> 
> 3. I think him to be the best person for the job.
> 
> The sentence is correct, but is not very idiomatic in AE.



I’m sorry, but I think you are wrong.

By your logic, one should say:

I think her to be beautiful.

That sentence doesn’t make any sense.

Instead, one should say:

I think she is beautiful.

I + think = subject-verb agreement

he/she + is = subject-verb agreement

I think I’m right in stating that the word “think” in that sentence is an intransitive verb.

In a sentence which starts like:

I think...

How can the verb “think” be a transitive verb? It doesn't make any sense.


----------



## grassy

Sarp84224 said:


> I’m sorry, but I think you are wrong.
> 
> By your logic, one should say:
> 
> I think her to be beautiful.
> 
> That sentence doesn’t make any sense.
> 
> Instead, one should say:
> 
> I think she is beautiful.


Both are grammatically correct. The first one is literary-sounding and rarely, if not never, used in conversation.


----------



## Sarp84224

grassy said:


> Both are grammatically correct. The first one is literary-sounding and rarely used in conversation.



Sorry, but how can both sentences be grammatically correct when they are using the same verbs but different pronouns?

Is the word “think” a transitive verb in such a case?

I find him... 

The word “find” is clearly a transitive verb.

But,

I think him...

The word “him” in such a case clearly is wrong because the verb “think” cannot take an object.


----------



## Edinburgher

Sarp84224 said:


> The word “him” in such a case clearly is wrong because the verb “think” cannot take an object.


Yes it can.  While "I think him" alone is wrong, "I think him (to be) <noun or adjective>" is perfectly fine.  It is similar to "believe":
_I believe (that) he is very talented. 
I believe him (to be) very talented. _

Check out think - WordReference.com Dictionary of English
Entry 8 in the Random House Learners list:
_She thought him a total fool._
Entry 13 in the Unabridged list:
_He thought me unkind._
Entry 1 in the Collins list:
_He thinks my ideas impractical_


----------



## Sarp84224

Edinburgher said:


> Yes it can.  While "I think him" alone is wrong, "I think him (to be) <noun or adjective>" is perfectly fine.  It is similar to "believe":
> _I believe (that) he is very talented.
> I believe him (to be) very talented. _
> 
> Check out think - WordReference.com Dictionary of English
> Entry 8 in the Random House Learners list:
> _She thought him a total fool._
> Entry 13 in the Unabridged list:
> _He thought me unkind._
> Entry 1 in the Collins list:
> _He thinks my ideas impractical_



In the sentence, “I believe him to be very talented”, does the verb “be” have anything to do with the object pronoun “him”?


----------



## Andygc

Edinburgher said:


> While "I think him" alone is wrong,


Well, no, it isn't.
I think him the best man for the job.
I think her the most beautiful woman in the world.


----------



## Sarp84224

Andygc said:


> Well, no, it isn't.
> I think him the best man for the job.
> I think her the most beautiful woman in the world.



I only ever hear people say “I think he is” and “I think she is”, why is that?

Can some verbs be used as transitive verbs or intransitive verbs in the same sentence structures?


----------



## Andygc

Sarp84224 said:


> why is that?


Because you don't mix with people who use this less common form of English?


----------



## Edinburgher

Andygc said:


> Well, no, it isn't.


Yes it is.  What I meant by "alone" is that "I think him" would be wrong as a stand-alone (complete self-contained) sentence.  I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

Your examples (and indeed mine) do not use "I think him" alone, but together with other ingredients that make it right.


----------



## Edinburgher

Sarp84224 said:


> In the sentence, “I believe him to be very talented”, does the verb “be” have anything to do with the object pronoun “him”?


Yes.  This sentence means exactly the same as "I believe that he is very talented".


----------



## Sarp84224

Edinburgher said:


> Yes.  This sentence means exactly the same as "I believe that he is very talented".



I know that. But, a verb only agrees with a subject and in that sentence “I” is agreeing with “believe” and “him” is the object of “believe”, right? So the verb “be” is not agreeing with any pronoun.

Am I right?


----------



## Edinburgher

The grammar is not straightforward, but essentially the whole clause "him to be very talented" is the object of "believe".  This is presumably why "him" is in objective and not subjective case.  Because no finite (conjugated) form of the verb fits a subject in the objective form (you can't say "him is talented" or "I believe him is talented"), the verb is left in its infinitive form.


----------



## kngram

think + object + (to be)+ complement
is an English language grammatical construction (Grammatical construction - Wikipedia)
of a very formal style that is very rare in everyday usage.
So. the example: I think him is the best person for the job.    incorrect.
It must look as : I think him (to be) the best person for the job.  correct.
The paraphrase of the construction as follows: I consider him to be the best person for the job.


----------



## Andygc

Edinburgher said:


> Yes it is.  What I meant by "alone" is that "I think him" would be wrong as a stand-alone (complete self-contained) sentence.  I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.
> 
> Your examples (and indeed mine) do not use "I think him" alone, but together with other ingredients that make it right.


Thank you. A misunderstanding.


----------



## Sarp84224

Andygc said:


> Well, no, it isn't.
> I think him the best man for the job.
> I think her the most beautiful woman in the world.



In those two examples, are the two words “him” and “her” or are the two clauses “him the best man for the job” and “her the most beautiful woman in the world” the objects of “think”?


----------



## Sarp84224

kngram said:


> think + object + (to be)+ complement
> is an English language grammatical construction (Grammatical construction - Wikipedia)
> of a very formal style that is very rare in everyday usage.
> So. the example: I think him is the best person for the job.    incorrect.
> It must look as : I think him (to be) the best person for the job.  correct.



Is that because the whole clause “him to be the best person for the job” is the object of the verb “think”?


----------



## Edinburgher

Sarp84224 said:


> In those two examples, are the two words “him” and “her” or are the two clauses “him the best man for the job” and “her the most beautiful woman in the world” the objects of “think”?


I think perhaps a better way of analyzing this is to say that "think" takes two objects, or more precisely an object and a complement, namely "him/her" as the object and the rest of the clause  (or phrase if "to be" is omitted) as the complement.

Other verbs can do this too.  For example:
_I called him a fool.
I called him stupid._
(Meaning "I said that he was ...")


----------



## kngram

Sarp84224 said:


> Is that because the whole clause “him to be the best person for the job” is the object of the verb “think”?


No. The object personal pronouns are the objects of the verb. But, the verb 'think' bears other semantical sense of the verb 'consider' here actually. This determines the whole grammatical construction.
' (to be) the best person for the job' works as if an attribute in the construction.


----------



## Sarp84224

kngram said:


> No. The object personal pronouns are the objects of the verb. But, the verb 'think' bears other semantical sense of the verb 'consider' here actually. This determines the whole grammatical construction.
> ' (to be) the best person for the job' works as if an attribute in the construction.



There is only one personal pronoun in the sentence - him.


----------



## Sarp84224

Edinburgher said:


> I think perhaps a better way of analyzing this is to say that "think" takes two objects, or more precisely an object and a complement, namely "him/her" as the object and the rest of the clause  (or phrase if "to be" is omitted) as the complement.
> 
> Other verbs can do this too.  For example:
> _I called him a fool.
> I called him stupid._
> (Meaning "I said that he was ...")



In the sentence, “I think he is the best person for the job.” is the clause “he is the best person for the job” the object of the verb “think”?

If I am understanding what you posted correctly, in the sentence:

I think him is the best person for the job.

I = subject
Think = verb
Him is the best person for the job = object clause which includes an object pronoun and an object complement

Wikipedia states that an object compliment is “in grammar, an *object complement* is a predicative expression that follows a direct object of an attributive ditransitive verb or resultative verb and that complements the direct object of the sentence by describing it.”

In the sentence, is the verb “is” an attributive ditransitive verb or a resultative verb?

A attributive ditransitive verb is “The first object is a direct object. The second object is an object complement.”

Him = object
The best person for the job = object complement

Is that right?


----------



## Sarp84224

Is “think” a ditransitive verb?


----------



## lingobingo

I was going to make the same point, that *think* is not a good verb to explain this use, since it’s usually only transitive in the sense of thinking a particular type of thought. A much clearer verb to use would be *consider*, or *deem*.

Subject + verb + direct object + non-finite clause as object complement:

I deem him to be worthy of the award.​We consider him [to be] the best person for the job.​​Subject + verb + dependent noun clause (often called a content clause). 
​We consider that he is the best person for the job.​


----------



## Sarp84224

lingobingo said:


> I was going to make the same point, that *think* is not a good verb to explain this use, since it’s usually only transitive in the sense of thinking a particular type of thought. A much clearer verb to use would be *consider*, or *deem*.
> 
> Subject + verb + direct object + non-finite clause as object complement:
> 
> I deem him to be worthy of the award.​We consider him [to be] the best person for the job.​​Subject + verb + dependent noun clause (often called a content clause).
> ​We consider that he is the best person for the job.​



In both of your sentences does the verb “be” govern the object pronoun “him”?

Hi, just so I don’t get more confused, can we stick to just using the word “think”?

In the two sentences:

1. I think he is the best person for the job.
2. I think him is the best person for the job.

1 = subject + verb + ???
2 = subject + verb + object + ???

In the first sentence, is “he is the best person for the job” an object clause?


----------



## lingobingo

1. I think [that] he is the best person for the job.
This construction is the same as the one I described above, using the verb consider.

2. I think him is the best person for the job.  
You can’t use the object pronoun *him* as the subject of the _finite_ verb *is*!

But you could say: 
I think of him as being / I see him as / I consider/deem him to be … the best person for the job

FINITE: (of a verb form) having a specific tense, number, and person.


----------



## Sarp84224

lingobingo said:


> 1. I think [that] he is the best person for the job.
> This construction is the same as the one I described above, using the verb consider.
> 
> 2. I think him is the best person for the job.
> You can’t use the object pronoun *him* as the subject of the _finite_ verb *is*!
> 
> But you could say:
> I think of him as being / I see him as / I consider/deem him to be … the best person for the job
> 
> FINITE: (of a verb form) having a specific tense, number, and person.



Why is “I think him is the best person for the job” wrong, but “I think him to be the best person for the job” is right?

Since “is” is a variant of “to be” so I’m confused. Is it because to be is the infinitive form?

I think him to be the best person for the job.

Subject + verb + object + ???

What is after the object pronoun “him”?

Is “think” a ditransitive verb in the sentence?


----------



## lingobingo

There’s no point in going to this in any more detail when you clearly don’t understand the basics. Before you can progress, you need to at least understand that this is impossible:
​I think him is the best person  ​Him is the best person, I think ​​


----------



## Sarp84224

lingobingo said:


> There’s no point in going to this in any more detail when you clearly don’t understand the basics. Before you can progress, you need to at least understand that this is impossible:
> ​I think him is the best person ​Him is the best person, I think ​​



I do understand that, which is why I’m asking, why is “I think him to be...” grammatically correct?


----------



## JulianStuart

Sarp84224 said:


> I do understand that, which is why I’m asking, why is “I think him to be...” grammatically correct?


Because that is what English speakers say and have said for a long time. (And others have explained #9, 11, 18 and 22) The only problem here is creating a description of the grammar involved that meets your idea of what the grammar rules are   To continue to insist the construction is "wrong" is (baselessly) adversarial Remember, grammar is a codificaton of how people speak: the language comes first and then people try to derive the grammar rules from  it, not vice versa!  (And then there are different systems of grammar nomenclature that are argued over discussed endlessly in other threads.)


----------



## Sarp84224

JulianStuart said:


> Because that is what English speakers say and have said for a long time. (And others have explained #9, 11, 18 and 22) The only problem here is creating a description of the grammar involved that meets your idea of what the grammar rules are  To continue to insist the construction is "wrong" is (baselessly) adversarial Remember, grammar is a codificaton of how people speak: the language comes first and then people try to derive the grammar rules from it, not vice versa! (And then there are different systems of grammar nomenclature that are argued over discussed endlessly in other threads.)



I’m not trying to be awkward, I just want to know what the different parts of the sentence are called.

“I think him to be the best person for the job.”

I understand the following:

I = subject pronoun 
Think = verb (what type of verb is it?)
Him = object pronoun 

It’s the following part I’m not understanding.

To be the best person for the job.

Is that an object complement of the verb “think”?


----------



## kngram

Sarp84224 said:


> There is only one personal pronoun in the sentence - him.


)  Sorry. It didn't matter. I answered to your question #20 as well. Just a typo made by me.


----------



## kngram

Sarp84224 said:


> I’m not trying to be awkward, I just want to know what the different parts of the sentence are called.
> 
> “I think him to be the best person for the job.”
> 
> I understand the following:
> 
> I = subject pronoun
> Think = verb (what type of verb is it?)
> Him = object pronoun
> 
> It’s the following part I’m not understanding.
> 
> To be the best person for the job.
> 
> Is that an object complement of the verb “think”?


Exerpt from the Google grammar: 
Object complements are adjectives, nouns, or pronouns that follow direct objects in order to indicate what the direct object's new state is (is expected to be for some verbs - note made by me) . In other words, object complements reveal what the direct object has become (or would be).


----------



## Sarp84224

kngram said:


> Exerpt from the Google grammar:
> Object complements are adjectives, nouns, or pronouns that follow direct objects in order to indicate what the direct object's new state is (is expected to be for some verbs - note made by me) . In other words, object complements reveal what the direct object has become (or would be).



So the sentence is basically subject + verb + object + object complement. And, because of that, the verb “think” is a ditransitive verb?


----------



## kngram

Sarp84224 said:


> So the sentence is basically subject + verb + object + object complement. And, because of that, the verb “think” is a ditransitive verb?


No, it is not. An exmplar usage of a ditransitive verb looks like 'They told me lies.'


----------



## JulianStuart

JulianStuart said:


> (And then there are different systems of grammar nomenclature that are argued over discussed endlessly in other threads.)


 One "grammar nomenclature system" (in wiki), has the following


> *Attributive ditransitive verbs[edit]*
> Another category of ditransitive verb is the attributive ditransitive verb in which the two objects are semantically an entity and a quality, a source and a result, etc. These verbs attribute one object to the other. In English, _make_, _name_, _appoint_, _consider_, _turn into_ and others are examples:
> 
> 
> _The state of New York made Hillary Clinton a Senator._
> _I will name him Galahad._
> The first object is a direct object. The second object is an object complement.[2][3]
> 
> Attributive ditransitive verbs are also referred to as resultative verbs.[4 [/QUOTE


----------



## Sarp84224

So in this case it’s just a transitive verb which has two objects (an object pronoun and an object complement)?


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

Sarp, part of the problem seems to be that you do not realize that the word "think" can have different meanings, which causes it to be used in different ways depending on context.

In addition to meaning "to have in the mind", it can also mean "consider".  Just as you can say "I consider him to be a skilled worker" (which can be shortened to _I consider him a skilled worker_), you can say "I think him to be a skilled worker/I think him a skilled worker."
All of these are correct, and the pairs mean the same thing:
I consider him unscrupulous/I think him unscrupulous
I consider her beautiful/I think her beautiful


----------



## Sarp84224

GreenWhiteBlue said:


> Sarp, part of the problem seems to be that you do not realize that the word "think" can have different meanings, which causes it to be used in different ways depending on context.
> 
> In addition to meaning "to have in the mind", it can also mean "consider".  Just as you can say "I consider him to be a skilled worker" (which can be shortened to _I consider him a skilled worker_), you can say "I think him to be a skilled worker/I think him a skilled worker."
> All of these are correct, and the pairs mean the same thing:
> I consider him unscrupulous/I think him unscrupulous
> I consider her beautiful/I think her beautiful



What I’m struggling to understand is what are the words after “him” described as in terms of grammar.

People have stated that the words after “him” are an object compliment. However, people have also stated that “think” is not a ditransitive verb, but an object compliment “is a predicative expression that follows a direct object of an attributive ditransitive verb or resultative verb and that complements the direct object of the sentence by describing it.”

Read post #18 to see what I mean.

Is “think” a resultative verb in the sentence?

Thus, what kind of verb is “think” in the sentence? That is why I’m so confused and want to understand the sentence properly.


----------



## Sarp84224

I found this:



> Note that the verb think cannot be followed by an object + to-infinitive. Instead, we use a that-clause.
> 
> I thought that she was reliable. (NOT I thought her to be reliable.



Verb + object + complement


----------



## kngram

Sarp84224 said:


> I found this:
> 
> 
> 
> Verb + object + complement


As it has been said above the grammar structure the verb+object+ (to be) +object complement is very unusual in modern everyday English, especially with the verb think. There is nothing that can wonder in your result of browsing on the Web.


----------



## kngram

Sarp84224 said:


> What I’m struggling to understand is what are the words after “him” described as in terms of grammar.
> 
> People have stated that the words after “him” are an object compliment. However, people have also stated that “think” is not a ditransitive verb, but an object compliment “is a predicative expression that follows a direct object of an attributive ditransitive verb or resultative verb and that complements the direct object of the sentence by describing it.”
> 
> Read post #18 to see what I mean.
> 
> Is “think” a resultative verb in the sentence?
> 
> Thus, what kind of verb is “think” in the sentence? That is why I’m so confused and want to understand the sentence properly.


The words after 'him' are the object complement in the terms of grammar. The grammar construction has got the verb 'think' in the sense of the verb of opinion 'consider.'


----------



## JulianStuart

Sarp84224 said:


> What I’m struggling to understand is what are the words after “him” described as in terms of grammar.
> 
> People have stated that the words after “him” are an object compliment. However, people have also stated that “think” is not a ditransitive verb, but an object compliment “is a predicative expression that follows a direct object of an attributive ditransitive verb or resultative verb and that complements the direct object of the sentence by describing it.”
> 
> Read post #18 to see what I mean.
> 
> Is “think” a resultative verb in the sentence?
> 
> Thus, what kind of verb is “think” in the sentence? That is why I’m so confused and want to understand the sentence properly.


It sounds as though you think there may be an answer _to which everyone agrees_ in terms of naming the structures, types of verbs complements, etc.  The understanding of the meaning of the sentence is surely already complete - it is only the naming of the structures that remains unclear for you, right?


----------



## PaulQ

As I see it, (and as described by Otto Jespersen in "A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles" Part V SYNTAX (Fourth Volume) at 1.7.)

Jesperson describes the object in the following as a nexus: "_Nexus, _i. e. a combination implying predication and as a rule containing a subject and either a verb or a predicative or both."

......I.......think....him..................clever
subject...verb...object..............adjective
subject...verb...object......complement of object
subject...verb..[.................object.....................]

.......I.......think......him.....the best person for the job.
Subject...verb.....object................noun phrase
Subject...verb.....object.......complement of object
subject...verb.....[....................object........................]

.......I.......think......him.....to be the best person for the job.
Subject...verb.....object................adjectival phrase
Subject...verb.....object.............complement of object
subject....verb....[.......................object...........................]


----------



## Sarp84224

kngram said:


> The words after 'him' are the object complement in the terms of grammar. The grammar construction has got the verb 'think' in the sense of the verb of opinion 'consider.'



Yes, and a quick Google search shows that the word “consider” can be used as a ditransitive verb which explains why the words after “him” are an object complement. So the word “think” (“consider”) in the sentence is being used as a ditransitive verb so the sentence is subject + verb + object + object compliment.


----------



## Sarp84224

JulianStuart said:


> It sounds as though you think there may be an answer _to which everyone agrees_ in terms of naming the structures, types of verbs complements, etc.  The understanding of the meaning of the sentence is surely already complete - it is only the naming of the structures that remains unclear for you, right?



Not really. I understand that different people have different opinions and I accept that. But, if one is saying that the word “think” (which in this case is being used as meaning “consider”) in the sentence as a ditransitive verb then the structure of the sentence makes sense (subject + verb + object + object compliment). But, if the words after “him” are not to be considered as an object compliment, what type of verb is “think” in the sentence?

And, if the sentence is to be structured as “I think he is the best person for the job” then that structure is subject + verb + object compliment. Right?


----------



## kngram

Sarp84224 said:


> Yes, and a quick Google search shows that the word “consider” can be used as a ditransitive verb which explains why the words after “him” are an object complement. So the word “think” (“consider”) in the sentence is being used as a ditransitive verb so the sentence is subject + verb + object + object compliment.


The commentators have already told you above that there are different grammar  nomenclatures. If you prefer this approach, nobody wants to object it.


----------



## Edinburgher

Sarp84224 said:


> But, if the words after “him” are not to be considered as an object compliment, what type of verb is “think” in the sentence?


 It wouldn't be enough to ask what type of verb "think" is; you would also need to ask what the words after "him" are, if they are not a complement.
The problem with the label "ditransitive" is that it describes a verb that takes two objects, but here we have one object plus another thing that isn't really an object, unless you think of complements (no matter whether they be subject complements or object complements) as being a special kind of object.  After all, we don't call copular verbs transitive: In "John is a hero", "is" is copular ("a linking verb"), not transitive, and "a hero" is not an object but a subject complement.  If we were to adopt a simplified nomenclature, and say that "is" is transitive, and "a hero" is an object, we would also need to accept the added complication that the "object" could be an adjective, not just a noun: "John is brave".


> And, if the sentence is to be structured as “I think he is the best person for the job” then that structure is subject + verb + object compliment. Right?


No, I think this would be subject + verb + object.  In this case "think" would be monotransitive.  What do I think?  I think a thought.  And that thought is "He is the best person for the job".


----------



## PaulQ

Sarp84224 said:


> Yes, and a quick Google search shows that the word “consider” can be used as a ditransitive verb which explains why the words after “him” are an object complement.


I would dismiss this unless you can provide sources.


Sarp84224 said:


> So the word “think” (“consider”) in the sentence is being used as a ditransitive verb so the sentence is subject + verb + object + object compliment.


A ditransitive verb must have two objects: a direct and an indirect object. If it only has one, it is monotransitive
He gave the beggar money:
S......V...........IO...........O

He gave the beggar - monotransitive
He gave money - monotransitive
He gave the beggar and money - monotransitive.


Sarp84224 said:


> I think him the best person for the job.


Can you please analyse that sentence in the form:
He gave the beggar money:
S......V...........IO...........O

I...think...him....the best person for the job.
S......V.....____....____________...._______


----------



## Sarp84224

Edinburgher said:


> It wouldn't be enough to ask what type of verb "think" is; you would also need to ask what the words after "him" are, if they are not a complement.



Well at least if the type of verb “think” is in the sentence then it will explain whether only an object is allowed, an object and an object complement, etc.



> The problem with the label "ditransitive" is that it describes a verb that takes two objects, but here we have one object plus another thing that isn't really an object, unless you think of complements (no matter whether they be subject complements or object complements) as being a special kind of object.  After all, we don't call copular verbs transitive: In "John is a hero", "is" is copular ("a linking verb"), not transitive, and "a hero" is not an object but a subject complement.  If we were to adopt a simplified nomenclature, and say that "is" is transitive, and "a hero" is an object, we would also need to accept the added complication that the "object" could be an adjective, not just a noun: "John is brave".



Why is it “not really” an object complement? And, copulate verbs don’t take objects so your example isn’t really relevant to “think” + object(s). 



> No, I think this would be subject + verb + object.  In this case "think" would be monotransitive.  What do I think?  I think a thought.  And that thought is "He is the best person for the job".



So let me get this clear, you think “him is the best person for the job” is the object of the verb “think”?

Rather than “him” being the object and the words after being regarded as something. Yes?


----------



## Sarp84224

PaulQ said:


> I would dismiss this unless you can provide sources.
> 
> A ditransitive verb must have two objects: a direct and an indirect object. If it only has one, it is monotransitive
> He gave the beggar money:
> S......V...........IO...........O
> 
> He gave the beggar - monotransitive
> He gave money - monotransitive
> He gave the beggar and money - monotransitive.
> Can you please analyse that sentence in the form:
> He gave the beggar money:
> S......V...........IO...........O
> 
> I...think...him....the best person for the job.
> S......V.....____....____________...._______



“Another category of ditransitive verb is the attributive ditransitive verb in which the two objects are semantically an entity and a quality, a source and a result, etc. These verbs attribute one object to the other. In English, make, name, appoint, consider, turn into and others are examples”

Ditransitive verb - Wikipedia

Subject + verb + object + object complement


----------



## kngram

Sarp84224 said:


> “Another category of ditransitive verb is the attributive ditransitive verb in which the two objects are semantically an entity and a quality, a source and a result, etc. These verbs attribute one object to the other. In English, make, name, appoint, consider, turn into and others are examples”
> 
> Ditransitive verb - Wikipedia
> 
> Subject + verb + object + object complement


) Sorry. Can you understand what your problem is ? You argue against a theory that has been taking shape for about 100 years. You have been even given a link to OttoJespersen's works. You didn't respond properly. Even with a slight due respect to this outstanding figure in the theory of the English grammar. Since that, many have lost any interest in explaining something to you.


----------



## JulianStuart

Sarp84224 said:


> “Another category of ditransitive verb is the attributive ditransitive verb in which the two objects are semantically an entity and a quality, a source and a result, etc. These verbs attribute one object to the other. In English, make, name, appoint, consider, turn into and others are examples”
> 
> Ditransitive verb - Wikipedia
> 
> Subject + verb + object + object complement


We already have that. See post #39


----------



## Edinburgher

Sarp84224 said:


> Well at least if the type of verb “think” is in the sentence then it *will explain whether* only an object *is allowed*, an object and an object complement, etc.


We don't need that explained to us, because we already know that "I think him the best person for the job" is correct.  We just don't seem to be very successful at convincing you of it. 


> Why is it “not really” an object complement?


 I didn't say that.  I said it is not really an object, *because* it is an object complement.


> And, copulate verbs don’t take objects so your example isn’t really relevant to “think” + object(s).


Yes, it is relevant to this example of "think". In this context ("I think him the best person"), "think" is partly monotransitive and partly copular. This is similar to ditransitive except that instead of a second object it takes an object complement. This is exactly what JS in #39 (and you in #54) call "attributive ditransitive". This seems to be the ideal label to apply in this case.


Sarp84224 said:


> So let me get this clear, you think “him is the best person for the job” is the object of the verb “think”?


No.  "I think *him is* the best person" is wrong.  We've told you this several times now.
But "I think *he is* the best person" is correct, and yes, I think that in that case "he is the best person" is the object of monotransitive "think".

Essentially, in "I think _____ the best person for the job", there are several options for what you can put in the blank.
Either (1) "him" by itself, with no "is", or (2) "him to be", or (3) "he is".
In case 1, "think" is attributive ditransitive, in case 3 it is monotransitive, and I'm not quite sure how to describe case 2.  Probably as a variant of case 1, but it's a pretty rare construction, so I wouldn't worry about it.


JulianStuart said:


> We already have that. See post #39


  I must have missed that when it first flew past. It seems the best fit for this, even though "think" doesn't play the role of "consider" all that often, and accordingly doesn't feature much in lists of verbs that can be used this way.


----------



## Sarp84224

Post #39 states “think” is a ditransitive verb so the structure of the sentence is subject + verb + object + object complement.

Where am I wrong?


----------



## PaulQ

Sarp84224 said:


> Post #39 states “think” is a ditransitive verb


This is irrelevant.


Sarp84224 said:


> Where am I wrong?


You did not read Jespersen (from the same source):
*Nexus as Object*​1.7. If we compare the following sentences,
(1) They judged me a happy man. (1a) “I think him the best man for the job”.
(2) I believe him as honest as myself.
(3) This will make her happy.
[…]
(9)...
and if we ask in each case what is the object of the verb, many grammars say that in the first six it is the word placed immediately after the verb, and the rest is called a "complement" of the object, or an "adjective or noun used predicatively of the object" (Sonnenschein)[…]

The correct analysis is that all these are analogous and contain *not two objects* (as in "I gave (made) her a ring"), but only one, which is a nexus containing the same two parts as a nexus that forms a complete sentence or clause; compare with (1) "They judged that I was a happy man" (1a) “I think that he is the best man for the job”.

*NB:The actual text uses (2) and other examples, but the principle is the same.*


----------



## Edinburgher

Sarp84224 said:


> Post #39 states “think” is a ditransitive verb


No!  You don't seem to be reading our answers properly.  It doesn't call it *ditransitive*.  It calls it *attributive ditransitive*.  The difference is that a "normal" ditransitive verb takes *two* objects, whereas an attributive ditransitive verb takes *one* object *and* an object complement.

This is one way of analyzing "I think him the best man for the job."

PQ's (Jespersen's) explanation in #59 is an alternative way of analyzing the same sentence.  Here, "think" is monotransitive, its single object being the nexus or combination of the object ("him") and its complement ("the best man for the job").


----------



## Sarp84224

Edinburgher said:


> No!  You don't seem to be reading our answers properly.  It doesn't call it *ditransitive*.  It calls it *attributive ditransitive*.  The difference is that a "normal" ditransitive verb takes *two* objects, whereas an attributive ditransitive verb takes *one* object *and* an object complement.
> 
> This is one way of analyzing "I think him the best man for the job."
> 
> PQ's (Jespersen's) explanation in #59 is an alternative way of analyzing the same sentence.  Here, "think" is monotransitive, its single object being the nexus or combination of the object ("him") and its complement ("the best man for the job").



So in the sentence “think” is an attributive ditransitive verb. Correct?


----------



## lentulax

Sarp84224 said:


> And, if the sentence is to be structured as “I think he is the best person for the job” then that structure is subject + verb + object compli*e*ment. Right?



No; no such structure could exist. As explained by kngram,#36 (though his #38 is wrong), a 'compl*e*ment' completes/describes/attributes a quality to something else; an object complement completes/describes/attributes something to the object. It would be logically impossible to have an object complement without an object. 
In simple old-fashioned terms, in the sentence 'I think (that) he is the best person for the job', '*that he is the best person for the job*' would be defined as a noun clause object (of the verb 'think'); possibly in the terminology you use it might be an SV-clause functioning as the object argument .

If your main interest is in linguistic theory, then you need to rely on one comprehensive and authoritative source, and get a real grip of the definitions there; the same words are often used in very different ways in linguistic analysis, and the sources you quote are inconsistent, unreliable and incomplete (as others, notably JulianStuart and lingobingo, have already said).

If your main interest is in learning English, then trying to master modern linguistic theory and its language and use it as a tool seems to me to be a huge waste of energy, and likely to result in a great deal of confusion and difficulty.


----------



## Edinburgher

Sarp84224 said:


> So in the sentence "I think *him* the best person for the job", “think” is an attributive ditransitive verb. Correct?


Yes, that is one way of analyzing it, but it is not the only way.  The nexus approach is another.


----------



## Sarp84224

lentulax said:


> No; no such structure could exist. As explained by kngram,#36 (though his #38 is wrong), a 'compl*e*ment' completes/describes/attributes a quality to something else; an object complement completes/describes/attributes something to the object. It would be logically impossible to have an object complement without an object.
> In simple old-fashioned terms, in the sentence 'I think (that) he is the best person for the job', '*that he is the best person for the job*' would be defined as a noun clause object (of the verb 'think'); possibly in the terminology you use it might be an SV-clause functioning as the object argument .



Thank you for your help.


----------



## Edinburgher

Sarp84224 said:


> So is it possible to have a noun clause object with a subject pronoun?


 Yes. 





> Since it is an object, does it not require an object pronoun?


 No.  The clause "he is the best person..." is isolated from the main clause "I think X" by the subordinating conjunction "that", and even when "that" is removed, the subject role of the pronoun within the clause is more important than the fact that the entire clause is an object.  That's why we have "he", not "him".

Only when you deprive the clause of its verb ("is") does the case of the pronoun change from subject to object, because it no longer has a verb that it can be the subject of:
_I think that *he is* the best...  
I think *he is* the best... 
I think *him* the best... 
_


----------

