Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 1989. 19/3. (Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 19)
Abkarovits, Endre: Contradictions in Describing and Using the -ing Form as Object. (Complement)
fhe majority oi Wie books studieo agree that we should use a gerund after dislik e but Colder (lEPr 53;, and Zandvoort <,25) find the infinitive also acceptable. Zandvoort claims the same about r ecollect, which is very unlikely if we take the components of the word into consideration, which clearly show backward reference. In the case of remembe r most books agree that backward reference involves the use of the gerund while if we have to call something into our mind before doing it, this second action is expressed by an infinitive. The infinitive is less frequently used in Zandvoort"s opinion, and Longman's Lexicon finds an object + infinitive also possible but that may be another misprint: V3 instead of V4. (Zandvoort: 25, LL : 305) Regre t is usually found with both infinitive and gerund patterns, but both Longman dictionaries suggest that the normal usage is the gerund, the pattern with the infinitive is not indicated, but we find a few examples with it, they seem to be treated as set phrases, Forge t, which is a third verb of the same group, though very important, is excluded from the lists of Thomson and Martinet (and similarly from that of Zandvoort). With like, love the pattern object + infinitive is neglected in LL. (LL: 241) Sometimes the figure of a verb pattern is missing although we can find examples of the construction in the same place. (E.g. the figures in brackets in my table in the case of pardon, perm it, entail ) Ihe patterns of p ropos e (ÄEP) and jdy^ad O&M) differ from those in other books because - indicated or not - only one meaning was chosen bet ore compiling the list. It is also interesting to compare the patterns of four similar verbs in Longman's Dictionary: like (T 3, 4, V3, 4), lov e (13, 4, V3), prefe r (T3, 4, V3) , ha t e ÍT3, 4, V3, 4). Why is V4 missing with lov e and prefer ? Is the object + in g construction impossible in the authors 1 opinion or is it just another misprint? Sugges t may only be iollowed by possessive and gerund in Cordec 's opinion, while Thomson and Martinet tolerate both possessive and accusative before ihe get und. 1 think the iocmer is note likely. Loathe, (can't) endure, , co mmen ce liave differing evaluation in the books that have oeen consulted, but tnis cannot Oe a mistake or a misprint, as examples are shown to illustrate both pattern i and pattern
