New answers tagged subject
You're just asking about terminology, right? Can one call a phrase with a subject and a non-finite verb a "clause"? The answer is yes, that is an ordinary use of the term "clause". There are both finite clauses (i.e., tensed clauses) and non-finite clauses. And, as you say, your example has two clauses: a main finite clause whose verb is "let" and an ...
Traditionally, a clause is indeed a finite verb and all its dependencies. The subject of the sentence is he, the (direct) object his daughter. The verb let is special in that it often has an object and an infinitive as a tertiary complement (third thingy that strongly depends on it, besides subject and object). You could analyse the infinitive after let as ...
Rephrased as "He allowed his daughter to listen to the music." it might be taken as an implied infinitive phrase.
You're right that Giles is the one doing the holding—as Brian Hitchcock and (I think) John Lawler noted a month ago. To make the attribution clearer, the author could have revised the relevant sentence to say something like this: Most damaging in Giles's assessment is his assertion that Piketty’s data on rising wealth inequality may be incorrect, since ...
I believe a change in verb would help. StackExchange is the website I hoped would win.
...is the website I wanted to see win the award...
Both sides of this question have been argued in the linguistic literature. "who" could be a topic, and then the sentence structure would be [who [ __ hears a noise]] on the analogy of other wh-questions with a wh-word moved to the top of the structure and leaving a gap, __, where it once was. Or, perhaps questions whose subject is a wh-word simply ...
The second way you phrased it in the question was clear: "I wanted StackExchange to win [the best website award.]" The bit in square brackets could be omitted if clear from context, to satisfy your requirement "without explicitly mentioning that it's the award that I want them to win."
Q: What is the subject of this sentence? A: What is the subject of that sentence.
Less ambiguous: The website [that/which] I wanted to win the award was StackExchange. The website [that/which] I want to win the award is StackExchange.
Although there is technically ambiguity in your original phrase, the context makes it very obvious which meaning you meant. However, if you are really desperate for a phrase with no ambiguity I would go for: I wanted Stack Exchange to win
Out of context the sentence StackExchange is the website I wanted to win is inherently ambiguous because of the nature of the verb to win, which is ambitransitive. In other words, win can be both transitive and intransitive: She won the award. (transitive) She won. (intransitive) So if Polly is a cat and I read the decontextualised sentence Polly ...
There are a number of ways you could structure this sentence, all of which would convey your point precisely as you mean it. Firstly, you could say "I hope that StackExchange wins [the Best Website Award]". This implies that, of the various potential 'nominees' for the Best Website Award, you want StackExchange to win the award. Alternatively, you could say ...
There is an elided "that" . . .there had been a special offer on sunbeds, and [that] it had seemed like the right thing to say at the time. So both these clauses are reported speech, as spoken by HER. And, because we don't know what anybody else said "at the time", we must infer that what SHE said at the time was what "seemed like the right thing to ...
Top 50 recent answers are included