THINKING

This type covers verbs of thinking, knowing, believing and the like. There are always two roles—a Cogitator (who is generally HUMAN) has in mind some Thought. THINKING verbs are basically transitive, with Cogitator in A and Thought in O syntactic relation. The Thought may be realized by an NP, or by one of a variety of complement clauses; the syntactic possibilities vary somewhat across subtypes.

The following subtypes can be distinguished:

(a) The THINK subtype, referring to the Cogitator’s mind just focusing on some person, thing, state or happening. The most general verb is think (of/about/over). Others include consider ‘think about some actual or possible state of affairs (and its consequences)’; imagine ‘think of something as if it were true, although the Cogitator is aware that it may not be true (and that it might be surprising if it were)’.

(b) The ASSUME subtype, when there is some doubt as to whether the Thought is true, e.g. assume ‘think of something as true when the Cogitator realizes that it is only likely—not certain—that it is’; and suppose ‘think of something as true when the Cogitator realizes that there is insufficient evidence to be sure that it is’.

(c) The PONDER subtype, referring to different modes of thinking, e.g. ponder (on/ over), meditate (on/about), brood (on/over), speculate (on/about), wonder (at/about), reflect (on/about), dream (of/about), contemplate.

(d) The REMEMBER subtype, referring to the Cogitator having in mind, or trying to get in mind, something from the past, e.g. remember ‘think about something from the past, or about something arranged in the past which is to take place in the present or future’, and forget ‘fail to think of something that one should have thought about, or that one should have been able to think about’.

(e) The KNOW subtype, referring to the Cogitator being aware of some fact, or body of information, or method of doing something. The most general verb is know. There are also sense ‘know some fact intuitively’ (one meaning of feel may also belong here); realize ‘suddenly think in an appropriate way, so as to know some fact’; learn ‘come to know something by (often diligent) effort’; and understand ‘know something, and also the reason for it’. Teach, a lexical causative related to know/understand, also belongs in this subtype; it has the meaning ‘Causer tries to help Cogitator know/understand some Thought’. Causer must be in A relation. If Cogitator and Thought are both NPs then either may be focused on, and placed in O syntactic relation, e.g. John taught geometry to Mary, John taught Mary geometry. If the Thought is expressed by a complement clause then it will follow the Cogitator, which must be in O slot, e.g. John taught Mary that the square on the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares on the other two sides.

(f) The CONCLUDE subtype, referring to using the mind to think about the consequences of certain facts, observations, assumptions, suppositions, etc., e.g. conclude, infer, reason, one sense of argue, prove, one sense of demonstrate, one sense of show, guess.

(g) The SOLVE subtype, referring to the mind thinking in such a way as to achieve some end, e.g. solve, work NP out; devise, make NP up; analyze.

(h) The BELIEVE subtype, referring to thinking of something as true. The verb believe means ‘think of something as true (when in fact it may not be, but the Cogitator will not accept that it may not be)’. There are also suspect ‘think that something is likely to be true’ and doubt ‘think that something is unlikely to be true’.

Dealing now with the grammatical properties of THINKING verbs:

(i) NP as object, and object omission

Verbs in all subtypes typically take a complement clause in O slot. An NP is a possible alternative, but for many verbs this must have non-CONCRETE reference, e.g. She learnt weaving, We assumed his cooperation, He proved the truth of the theorem. Some verbs may have a CONCRETE noun as head of the NP, but this leaves something unsaid about that thing, which the addressee may be assumed to be aware of, e.g. We considered Mary (for promotion), She understands John (i.e. the reason he acts as he does), They speculated about the house (what price it would fetch at the forthcoming auction). The most common verbs from the THINKING type may more frequently have a CONCRETE NP in Thought role, e.g. think (of/about), remember, forget, believe, but even here some amplification may be implicit, e.g. I am thinking of Odette (of how much I love her), I forgot John (i.e. forgot to invite him to my party). Know has a special sense, ‘be acquainted with a person or place’, e.g. I know Paris/Peter Matthews well, which is rather different from the ‘be aware of something’ meaning, which it shares with sense, realize, etc. Believe also has a special sense, marked by the preposition in—compare I believed Mary (i.e. what she said) with I believe (in (the existence of) the Christian god), and I believe in (the wisdom and goodness of) my boss.

Most verbs in the PONDER subtype take a preposition before a Thought NP (this does, of course, drop before that, e.g. I reflected on John’s deciding to withdraw, I reflected that John had decided to withdraw). It is a difficult decision whether to regard these as transitive verbs with an inherent preposition, or as intransitive verbs which can take a peripheral NP referring to the Thought. In favor of the transitive alternative is the fact that these NPs passivize relatively easily, e.g. That decision by the Vice-Chancellor has been wondered at in every committee room of the university. But, as some support for the intransitive analysis, the preposition-plus-NP can be freely omitted after most PONDER verbs, e.g. She is meditating/brooding/reflecting.

Both dream and think have cross-membership of the CORPOREAL type. Like many other CORPOREAL verbs, they may be followed by a cognate NP, e.g. I dreamt a perfectly lovely dream, She has a tendency to think really evil thoughts. Note that these cognate NPs, which may not have the full syntactic status of ‘object’, immediately follow the verb. Think (of/about) and dream (of/about), as THINKING verbs, involve an inherent preposition before the O NP (which can readily be passivized, e.g. That change in the plans has been thought about for an awfully long time).

Some THINKING verbs, such as think, dream and learn, may omit an object NP only in the generic tense or imperfective aspect, e.g. I dream every night, I’m learning (gradually). Others, such as infer and prove, are seldom used in the imperfective and must always have an O NP stated. Verbs from subtype (d) and some of those from (e)—remember, forget, know (in the ‘be aware of something’ sense) and understand—can omit an O NP if it can be inferred from the context, e.g. ‘Mary won the prize’. ‘I know’ (sc. that she did) and ‘Fred won’t come to the door’. ‘Oh, I understand’ (sc. why he won’t). (Believe can occur with no object only when used in a religious sense, e.g. He believes (in the Christian god).)

Verbs from subtypes (a), (b) and (g) (excluding the negative verb doubt) may use so in place of the Thought role where this could be inferred, e.g. ‘Does John know?’ ‘I assume so’ (sc. that he knows). For guess the so may optionally be omitted in some dialects, e.g. ‘Will she win?’ ‘I guess (so).’

(ii) THAT, WH- and WH- TO complements

All THINKING verbs may take a THAT complement in O slot except perhaps for some from the PONDER subtype (e.g. brood, meditate). Only the ASSUME and BELIEVE subtypes, and certain members of SOLVE, do not accept some instance of WH- or WH- TO (doubt is an exception—it takes a WHETHER clause as a near-paraphrase of a THAT complement, e.g. I doubt that/ whether John will win).

(iii) ING complements

Verbs from THINK, PONDER and REMEMBER may have an ING clause for the Thought role; the subject of the complement clause can be identical to the subject of the main clause and will then be omitted, e.g. I thought of/imagined/speculated about/remember (Mary’s) being attacked when on holiday in Nigeria. Understand, from the KNOW subtype, may also have an ING clause in O slot. Here the complement clause subject is unlikely to be the same as the main clause subject; if it is, it would not normally be omitted, e.g. I understood Mary’s/my being denied promotion.

(iv) Judgement TO complements

All except the PONDER and SOLVE subtypes and doubt (and the causative teach) can take a Judgement TO complement, e.g. I guessed/supposed/knew/ inferred/ suspected John to be clever. (Forget only takes Judgement TO in limited circumstances; some speakers accept I’d forgotten him to be so fat.) The to be can often be omitted, just after think, consider and imagine, e.g. We considered him (to be) stupid, I think it (to be) very unlikely. Other verbs allow the to be to drop only in certain circumstances, e.g. I supposed him (to be) dead/sick but only I supposed him to be clever/tall/rich/alive, with the to be retained.

Show and prove have the special property that, with a TO complement, the A and O NPs can be coreferential—compare the regular construction John showed Fred to be stupid (by analyzing his behavior) and the special one Fred showed himself to be stupid (by the way he behaved). Prove, but not show, has an even more abbreviated construction type, with the reflexive pronoun and to be omitted, e.g. Our guide proved (himself) (to be) useless.

(v) Modal (FOR) to complements

Remember, forget, know, learn and teach may take a Modal (FOR) TO complement. This will often have its subject coreferential with the main clause subject, and then omitted, e.g. I remembered/ forgot/ knew/ learnt to stand up when the judge enters the room; or, the subjects can be different (and then for must be retained), e.g. I remembered for Mary to take her pill. Think may also take a Modal (FOR) TO complement but only, it appears, in the past tense and in a negation or question, e.g. ‘Did you think to lock the door?’, ‘I didn’t think to lock the door.’ (Remember, know and learn—and think, in restricted circumstances—are thus numbered among the very few verbs to accept both Modal and Judgement varieties of TO complement.)

Alone of THINKING verbs, know may take a Modal (FOR) TO complement with both for and to omitted, similar to a small set of ATTENTION verbs. This usage appears always to involve past tense or previous aspect, and very often includes a negator such as never or not, e.g. They’d never known him hit her. As with ATTENTION (and MAKING) verbs, the suppressed to must be used in the passive, e.g. He had never been known to hit her.