This is an interesting question, because although it looks as if the two alternative sentences are very similar, they are, in actual fact, completely different constructions. First let's consider:
The discovery has excited scientists.
This has the clause structure:
Subject, Predicator, Object (where predicator is the function carried out by the verb)
1.) He died a broken man.
2.) He died as a broken man.
Both are fine, are grammatical, and are standard English usage.
In your two examples, the expressions "a broken man" are predicative and are functioning as predicative complements (PC).
Here are some related examples:
CGEL, page 261, : He died young.
The "young" in that example has a ...
The semantics of the verb allow meaning "permit" has three arguments, making it a trivalent verb. Using the linguistic terminology for thematic relations, there is the entity that is granting the permission (the agent), the entity that receives the permission (the patient), and the thing that is permitted (the theme).
The verb allow can be used in three ...
Adjectives which take infinitival phrases as complement fall into three camps.
Some adjectives determine our interpretation of the subject of the infinitival clause.
Some adjectives determine our interpretation of the object of the infinitival clause.
Some adjectives don't determine our interpretation of either the subject or the object of the infinitival ...
None of them are incorrect.
English sense verbs, unlike most complement-taking verbs,
can take either gerund or infinitive complements.
I saw/heard him leave/leaving.
This is most common with long-distance senses, of course;
-- She smelled him leaving is a fairly unlikely (though not ungrammatical) thing to say.
It may be (and undoubtedly some people ...
It's grammatical. As per my answer at SAH's question, it's grammaticality is flushed out when one adds what has been (or can be taken to have been) elided, so:
I am who/m God made me to be.
For which I vote for who based on "it sounds better" (the be-all-and-end-all of descriptive linguistics).
I am who God made me (to be)
McCawley doesn't say much about it, as far as I can see, but it appears to be a variety of the complex of serial verb constructions around motion verbs and their inchoatives and causatives, like the various serial verb constructions mentioned in this freshman grammar exam question (#4, restricted to come and go):
Bill went and dug some clams. (go and + V)
The recommend + person + to-infinitive formulation seems to have been more common in the past, while the recommend that + person + subjunctive appears to be gaining currency. Here's an example of the change using the pronoun him and the verb be.
Your analyses of (1) and (2) are both correct. They do indeed refer to the ‘as X as Y (is)’ construction.
Your analysis on (3), however, is not quite right. ‘Ever’ when used as an intensifier is confined (as far as I can think of) to three specific circumstances:
With comparatives: When used before a comparative adjective, ever intensifies the ...
Based on my own feeling:
"has scientists excited" sounds more like they have been and still are excited
"has excited scientists" sounds like they were excited and might not be anymore.
Neither are incorrect though.
*I got them all correctly. (ungrammatical)
I got them all correct.
I'm assuming here that the Original Poster means that his answers to the question were correct (sentence (1) would be grammatical if the meaning was entirely different). In order to understand why we need to use correct here, and why correctly is wrong, we need to understand the ...
Worth is a member of a class of adjectives known as transitive adjectives: those that require or permit a complement. Such complements are often prepositional phrases (proud of, delighted with, successful at) or infinitives (eager/reluctant/important to do something). A very limited number of adjectives in this class take a noun phrase as a complement:
I think "she looked it" is more idiomatic.
It's equivalent to saying "She was the picture of sorrow"
Saying "she looked so" is correct, but a litle unusual.
Most readers would be left thinking "she looked so .., what?"
You seem to have confused the to particle used in certain infinitive constructs with to used as a preposition.
In English, the phrasal verb confess to takes the -ing form of the verb as its complement, not a bare infinitive as you have used here.
He confessed to forging the signature.
He confessed to having forged the signature.
This acts as the head of ...
It formed inside him an ambition to teach his students all the more.
It formed an ambition to teach his students all the more inside him.
He kept in the book bag an apple. (awkward or marked)
He kept an apple in the book bag.
The differing acceptability of these examples is due to a phenomenon known as HEAVY NOUN PHRASE SHIFT. It gives us the ...
*"He is difficult to be pleased" is ungrammatical. The object of the infinitival verb can be made subject ("He is difficult to please [him]"), but the subject cannot ("He is difficult to [him] be pleased").
Why does it work that way? I don't know. The syntactic rule involved is tough-movement, which has a Wikipedia entry, Tough movement.
Raw here is a Predicative Adjunct. It is an adjective and not an adverb because it is describing the noun phrase, garlic. Predicative Adjuncts are very often adjectives. They're almost never adverbs.
Verbs set up slots for different types of phrase. The number of slots depends on the individual verb. All verbs set up a slot for ...
The reason is that traditionally, you can't use who in fused relative clauses; that is, you cannot use who when it figures in two clauses, being the subject (object) of one and the subject (object) of another.
Shakespeare used fused relative clauses:
who steals my purse steals trash.
And they seem to be coming back into use in English today:
I can ...
It is tempting to see off guard as an adverbial. As such, it would mean ‘My Great Uncle Algie kept trying to catch me in an off guard manner’, but that clearly cannot be. It was neither the aunt nor the manner of catching that was off guard, but the nephew. It follows that off guard is an adjective which postmodifies me.
Collins Cobuild term verbs such as be, remain, look, and turn link verbs, some of which take an 'adjective complement'. Certainly, Her teeth were etc need some form of completer. A snag is that one can't really sensibly separate syntax and semantics here. Be in this usage is certainly just a placeholder, whilst turn has added semantic content (as well as ...
No, the that-clause has no grammatical relationship with the largest. It's quite possible there was previously a larger house in the town (that's just been demolished, perhaps).
What the final clause modifies is specifically the word most, but it's complicated by the fact that strictly speaking there's a deleted second instance (the most hospitable and [the ...
It has in it fat, which gives energy.
This is an example of what is called object postposing.
In English, we normally expect to see direct objects occurring directly after the verb:
I have a baboon.
Other complements of the verb, including Adjective Phrases or Preposition Phrases functioning as predicative complements, will come after the direct object....
Leaving out the Toe Suck Fairy, an independently serious Healthy Hyphenation™ problem,
the sentence to be accounted for is
There was a man known as X.
This is a very simple sentence, suitable for beginning stories, displaying two syntactic processes:
inverts the verb and the original subject, and inserts a dummy there as the new ...
The rule is that verb in the main clause—try, need—determines what form its complements take.
Need takes marked infinitival complements—that is, clauses headed by a verb in the infinitive marked with to:
I need to work harder.
All I need is to work harder.
Try takes two sorts of complements.
In the sense you probably intend, &...
Adjectives most often take preposition phrases, or clauses as Complements. However, very few of them can take noun phrase Complements. There are, nonetheless, four common adjectives that are traditionally recognised to take noun phrase Complements: like, unlike, worth, and due.
John is very like [his father]
It was unlike [anything I had ever seen]
It's not ...
I think part of your difficulty is that you're trying to make your analysis 'worry' about things that traditional grammar worried about but which aren't really relevant to a modern analysis. Remember that in a modern analysis:
you are not constrained to the traditional assumption that every grammatical feature must be overtly present (in other words, you ...
One way of dealing with this structure is to propose something called a small clause, which is effectively a structure encapsulating arguments (e.g. subject, complement) as though there was a verb, but without an actual verb present inside the "clause".
The structure crops up 'on the surface' in various cases such as:
English: They considered [[him] [...
An interesting bunch of examples, and correctly grouped.
However, the three groups are not monophyletic. Briefly,
Group A is an example of what linguists call a "rule conspiracy", where a number of independently motivated processes "conspire" to produce a similar surface structure. Georgia Green discussed them in her paper [Green, Georgia M. (1970) 'How ...