LIKING

Verbs of this type have two roles—an Experiencer (who must be HUMAN or a higher animal) gets a certain feeling about a Stimulus. The meaning of the verb expresses the nature of the feeling.

LIKING verbs can roughly be divided into the following sets: (i) like, love, hate, prefer; fear; dread (also in WANTING); (ii) dislike, loathe, abhor, admire, value; regret (also a member of the REPORT subtype of SPEACKING); rejoice in/ at; (don’t) mind (about), (don’t) care (about); (iii) enjoy, favor, object to, approve of (the adjective fond, in be fond of, patterns with set (iii); (iv) worship, fall for.

These verbs are transitive with the Experiencer in A relation and the Stimulus—which cannot be omitted—in O relation. The only exceptions are (don’t) care (about) and (don’t) mind (about), which may freely omit about-plus-Stimulus and are perhaps best regarded as basically intransitive. It used to be that enjoy was only used as a transitive verb, so that a waiter or waitress would urge a diner: Enjoy it! In recent years, this verb has taken on an intransitive sense, so that a waitperson now says just: Enjoy!

The Stimulus may be realized in a variety of ways. It can be a straightforward concrete NP, as in I, or an ING complement, as in II. The subject of an ING clause will be omitted when it is coreferential with main clause subject, as in IIb.

I. Fred likes horses/Mary/your uncle/the wet season

IIa. Fred likes John’s playing baseball

IIb. Fred likes playing baseball

Or the Stimulus can have two components (similar to those of the Message role for SPEACKING verbs)—a Stimulus-Label, generally a SPEECH ACT or other abstract noun—linked by a preposition to a Stimulus-Content, which can be an NP, or an ING, THAT, or Modal (FOR) TO complement. Thus:

IIIa. Fred likes the proposal

IIIb. Fred likes the proposal about baseball

IIIc. Fred likes the proposal about (our) playing baseball instead of cricket on Saturdays

IIId. Fred likes the proposal that we should switch to baseball

IIIe. Fred likes the proposal for us to switch to baseball

IIIf. Fred likes the proposal to switch to baseball

(Following a general rule of English, the preposition drops before that, for or to in IIId/e/f.)

As described, a Message role may include just Label, or Label-preposition-Content, or—for some SPEACKING verbs—just Content. The Stimulus role allows different possibilities. It may just comprise a Label, as in IIIa. But it may not omit the Label from IIId. That is, one cannot say, in most dialects of English, *Fred likes that we now play baseball.

It is possible, however, to substitute the impersonal pronoun it for the Label in frame IIId. The Label may be omitted from IIIf, with no substitution, and it may be omitted from IIIe with substitution of it. (Omitting the Label plus preposition from IIIc gives IIa.)

IIId’. Fred likes it that we now play baseball

IIIe’. Fred would like (it for) us to switch to baseball

IIIf’. Fred would like to switch to baseball

We can first focus on the inclusion of the impersonal pronoun in IIId’/e’. It is clear that the substitution of it does engender a semantic difference. The Stimulus-Label may be one of a number of nouns, with different meanings, e.g. proposal, idea, suggestion, fact. When it replaces the Label the Stimulus has a meaning rather close to that with fact—I like the fact that he stands up to the boss is a near paraphrase of I like it that he stands up to the boss. A Stimulus with it certainly has a different sense from one with the proposal (which is why I changed the verb phrase of the complement clause in IIId’, in order to ensure a felicitous sentence). The sequence it for can be omitted from IIIe’, with a definite semantic effect.

Stimulus-Label and Stimulus-Content essentially make up one syntactic component, in O slot. An adverb may follow the complete statement of Stimulus, e.g. I like the suggestion that we should disarm an awful lot, I’d like it for us to disarm very much. But the Content component can be moved to the end of the clause, and an adverb may then come between the Label (which remains in O slot) and the Content, e.g. I like the suggestion an awful lot that we should disarm, I’d like it very much for us to disarm. (The longer the Content is, the more likely it is to be moved to the end of the clause) Extra-position of Content applies in almost exactly the same manner for ANNOYING verbs, described later, and is then more visible.

No it can come before to in IIIf’ but an adverb may still come before or after the TO clause (as it may come before or after THAT and FOR TO complements in IIId’/e’), e.g. I would like very much to switch to baseball, I would like to switch to baseball very much. The question of why it should be obligatory in IIId’, optional in IIIe’ (speakers vary in their judgements here) and obligatorily absent in IIIf’ is an interesting one, to which no answer is at present known.

Turning now to the syntactic behavior of different LIKING verbs, it appears that they can all occur with an NP or ING clause as Stimulus but may not all be equally happy with THAT and (FOR) TO complements. There are no hard and fast divisions (which is why we do not talk of subtypes), rather a scale of relative acceptability.

Set (i) is at home in all the frames discussed, with ING, THAT and (FOR) TO complements. Set (ii) is found with ING and THAT clauses but appears awkward with FOR and TO complements (IIIe/f and IIIe’/f’). One hears I like/hate to go but scarcely *I dislike/loathe to go; they become more acceptable if would is included, e.g. I would dislike/loathe to go. (We do get I don’t care to go, meaning ‘don’t want to’, but this is a different meaning of don’t care (about) from that in I don’t care about the proposal that we should go, where the sense is ‘be indifferent to’.) Set (iii) is almost restricted to NP and ING codings of Stimulus. It sounds most odd with (FOR) TO and TO complements, and the possibilities for THAT clauses (frames IIId/d’) are very limited—one might accept I enjoy it that John cooks and perhaps ?I favor the idea that Mary (should) organize the picnic, but scarcely ??I enjoy the fact that John cooks or?? I favor it that Mary should organize the picnic. Set (iv) appears restricted to an NP Stimulus.

Object to and approve of each include an inherent preposition and (don’t) care (about) includes a preposition before the Stimulus, if this is stated. These prepositions must be included in frames I, II, IIIa–f. In IIId’ about it is omitted after don’t care, e.g. I don’t care (*about it) that we may switch to baseball and—to the extent that object to and approve of are used in frame IIId’—the to it and of it may either be omitted or retained, e.g. I object (to it) that John wants to play cricket; I approve (of it) that John adores baseball.

With (don’t) mind the preposition may be included or omitted in all of I, II, IIIa–e. In fact it carries a semantic difference: don’t mind implies that the speaker is stoical about something that may adversely affect them, whereas don’t mind about indicates indifference, similar to don’t care about. Compare I don’t mind Mary (let her insult me all she wants, I’ve got a thick skin) with I don’t mind about Mary (couldn’t give a damn what happens to her); and I don’t mind the proposal that my salary should be cut (sure it’ll affect me, but I do have a private income) with I don’t mind about the proposal that my salary should be cut (since I know it’s just hot air, they wouldn’t dare actually do it). The contrast should be neutralized in frame IIId’, since a preposition must drop before that; but in fact I don’t mind that my salary will/may be cut has the clear sense of don’t mind (not don’t mind about).

Rejoice in/at appears to belong to set (ii), but is unusual in that it does not include it before a THAT complement (e.g. I rejoiced that he had returned unharmed).

Fear and dread have rather different meanings from the other LIKING verbs. They occur in frames I, II, IIIa–e and, typically, IIIf’, but not in IIIe’, where the Stimulus is realized as a FOR TO clause with no preceding Label. Both occur in IIId’ but here dread may omit the it and fear would generally omit it, e.g. I dread (it) that she may return home, I fear (?it) that she may return home. (It is interesting that rejoice and fear, two verbs which do not take it before a THAT clause, appear to be the only LIKING verbs to occur in parentheticals)

Two further verbs may be regarded as divergent members of this type. Envy, but not pity, can occur in frames I and IIa, e.g. I envy Mary’s luck, I envy Mary’s getting promoted. But envy is more felicitously used—and pity must be used—in a quite diVerent frame, where the verb is followed by an NP referring to a person (who is the object of the envy/pity), optionally followed by a constituent stating the reason for this emotional attitude— this can be an NP, or a Label followed by preposition and ING or THAT clause, or just an ING or THAT clause:

IVa. I envy Mary her promotion

IVb. I envy Mary (the fact of) her husband (’s) being such a good cook

IVc. I envy Mary (the fact) that she got promoted

Note that the subject of an ING complement (her in IVb) may optionally be omitted if it is coreferential with main clause object (e.g. I envy Mary being so quick at figures).

(The adjective jealous (of) has a very similar meaning to envy but different syntactic possibilities—we cannot say *I was jealous of Mary her promotion, only something like I was jealous of Mary because of her promotion.)