More on Predicative Complements

'for' and 'as'

In a previous post I talked about Predicative Complements, occurring in the structures below:

[linking verb + Subject-oriented Predicative Complement]

and

[verb + Direct Object + Object-oriented Predicative Complement]

Here are some examples:

I became a teacher

I considered the election a fiasco.

Predicative Complements also occur in an alternative construction in which they are placed after a preposition. We then call them Oblique Predicative Complements.¹

Let’s look at some examples that contain Oblique Predicative Complements (shown in bold):

(1) Now, the mango chicken on its own would make for a great meal! (2016, The iWeb Corpus, iWeb, Davies 2018)

(2) This is the sort of shot that might once have passed for real, before people got wise. (2022, NOW: pocket-lint.com)

(3) For 22 years, he was a member of Spring Cove School Board, where he had formerly served as president. (2017, iWeb)

(4) Corner Traction Control now comes as standard. (2013, iWeb)

(5) Its lifespan was even threatened again when a DVD distribution company mistook it for piracy. (2010, iWeb)

(6) And these people left me for dead. (2014, iWeb)

(7) The rest of London, however, quite naturally regarded them as spoiled twits. (2003, iWeb)

(8) Only 30 per cent of end users rated relationship as important. (2017, iWeb)

Just like ‘ordinary’ Predicative Complements, Oblique Predicative Complements ascribe a property to the referent of a noun phrase. However, they do so indirectly, with the ‘mediation’ of a preposition, hence the label ‘oblique’.

The phrase that the Predicative Complement ascribes a property to can be a Subject, as in (1) — (4), or a Direct Object, as in (5) — (8).

Notice that the Oblique Predicative Complement itself can be realised as a noun phrase, as in (1), (3), (5) and (7), or as an adjective phrase, as in (2), (4), (6) and (8).

Typically, the prepositions involved are for and as. Is there a difference between these two?

Jespersen (1909-49: IV, 375) claims that Oblique Predicative Constructions are more or less identical to the ‘ordinary’ predicative constructions shown in (1)–(4), or at least ‘parallel’.

In Aarts (2023) I trace the history of these constructions from Old English onwards, with a special focus on the prepositions for and as, which are the only ones that remain in this construction in Present-Day English (PDE). In older English to, unto and into were also possible.

Let’s first see what the Oxford English Dictionary has to say about predicative for. It is defined as follows:

as being, as equivalent to, in the character of. Now chiefly restricted to use with certain verbs and in set phrases. Used especially to introduce the complement after copular verbs, where as, as being, or to be may generally be substituted, (OED, s.v. for, A, VI, 18 a (a)).

As is listed as an adverb or conjunction – not as a preposition – and is defined similarly:

in the character, capacity, or function of’ (OED, s.v. as, B, II, 11a(a)).

Jespersen (1909–49, IV: 376) states that ‘[f]or with a predicative means practically the same thing as as’, and Poutsma writes: ‘[i]n some connexions we often find for as a variant of as’ (1914–29, I, first half: 349).

But are for and as really the same, interchangeable, or one another's variants? In my article I argue that for and as have special meanings which we can characterise as qua and qualitate qua, which can be glossed as follows:

‘Qua NP/AdjP’ is a shorthand for ‘as being’ (‘in its existence as’) NP/AdjP’.

‘Qualitate qua NP/AdjP’ is shorthand for ‘in its capacity/identity/role as NP/AdjP’.

These differentiated meanings have a powerful explanatory force. Consider the following examples, which contain the pattern ‘take NP for’:

(9) They won't take me for (*as) a killer. They'll let me go free. (1996, COCA: MOV)

(10) Colonel Kinder concluded with the strongest compliment an officer can give. “I would take him as (*for) a soldier in the Army,” he said. (1995, COCA: NEWS)

In (9) the person referred to as ‘me’ is considered ‘as not being’ a killer (‘They won't take me to be a killer’). It is ungrammatical with as in the qua reading. However, if an assassin were being contracted, the qualitate qua reading with as would be fine:

(11) That gang won't take me as a killer, but they will take me as a bruiser.

Example (10) signals a meaning to do with ‘his’ role as soldier in the army. It is ungrammatical with for in the qualitate qua reading, but in the following example the qua reading with for is fine:

(12) Considering his uniform, I would take him for a soldier in the army, not for an officer in the police force.

Consider next a recent example in which an author reflects on the end of her marriage:

(13) Looking at the wooden tallboy my mum bought us for a wedding present, two of the drawers suddenly empty, it was the first tangible moment of realisation that it wasn't just our marriage that was over, but the life we had created together and shared for 13 years. (The Guardian, 5 April 2023)

In this case as would also have been possible, but it would have meant that the writer was concerned with the item of furniture ‘in its identity/role as a wedding present’, whereas in fact she wishes to communicate that the tallboy's existence qua wedding present made her realise that her relationship to her husband had ended.

Verbs such as disguise, regard and see always take as:

(14) When she accidentally ruins her father's rickshaw she disguises herself as (*for) a boy and meets someone who will change her life. (2018, iWeb)

(15) One's attitude to him depends on whether you regard politics as (*for) a job with serious consequences, or as (*for) status theatre. (2019, NOW: UK)

(16) My colleagues seem startled when I mention Freud, but I see him as (*for) one of the few psychologists who failed to fall prey to physics envy. (2023, iWeb)

In each of these cases the status, role or identity of the referent of the predicand is at issue.

I also argue in my article that predicative for is not obsolescent, despite a claim made by Visser that predicative as is now dominant at the expense of for:

In Old, Middle and early Modern English for and to were largely predominant. As was extremely rare in Middle English, remained the exception in early Modern English, to become, however, the favourite in Pres. D. English by gradually replacing the older rivals …. (Visser 1963–73, I: 586)

However, predicative for survives in English due to the productivity and persistence of a number of constructions involving this preposition in which the qua and qualitate qua semantics of for and as can be distinguished clearly.

Consider first (17) and (18) below, in which the for-phrase and as-phrase function as Adjunct:

(17) For a politician, Herzog appears to know quite a bit about Bitcoin, even casually dropping a reference to the cryptocurrency's recent, once-in-four-years halving event in an interview this week. (2020, NOW)

(18) As a politician, Smalls authored state legislation that gave South Carolina the first free and compulsory public school system in the United States. (2021, iWeb)

There is a clear distinction in meaning in cases like these. Example (17) means: ‘considering that he is a politician, …’, whereas (18) means ‘in his role as a politician, …’.

Next, consider the construction ‘with (a) X for (a) Y’:

(19) So Mary moved like the priest of her own beauty, with her dressing-table for altar and her maid for acolyte. (1923, Kaye Smith The End of the House of Alard; quoted in Jespersen 1909–49, IV: 379)

(20) …over the radio comes an announcement that a crazed killer with a hook for a hand has escaped from the insane asylum. (1992, COCA: MAG)

(21) The bedroom had a twin and a double bed, a dresser, a treadle sewing machine, and a closet with a curtain for a door. (2011, COCA: FIC)

(22) I played cricket regularly on the open grounds beside the cemetery behind Oceanic Hotel – with sticks for stumps, sharing a bat with teammates. (NOW: India)

I found many similar examples – mostly hapaxes,² indicating a productive pattern – in the COCA and iWeb corpora.

And I particularly like an example I came across in a novel:

A few minutes later, with the door closed behind her children, Kiki turned to her husband with a thesis for a face, of which only Howard could know every line and reference. (Zadie Smith, On Beauty, 2005, Penguin, p14)

Interestingly, we have a kind of reversed predication here, because the face is like a thesis, not the other way round!

We also have the construction ‘verb for NP/AdjP that…’, as in these examples:

(23) He knew for a fact that his father did not see Mr S (1909, Arnold Bennett, Old Wives’ Tale; quoted in Jespersen 1909–49, IV: 377)

(24) We know for certain that Fleming tracked down Aleister Crowley for advice concerning Hess's interrogation, which prompted Crowley to write to the DNI. (2016, iWeb)

(25) The director takes for granted that this person will be back year after year and do the wonderful job he or she does. (2012, iWeb)

Example (23) means ‘The proposition that his father did not see Mr S is known qua (‘as being’) a fact’. In other words: ‘He knew this: it was a fact that his father did not see Mr S’.

If we have as in (23) the meaning changes to ‘He knew this: the proposition that his father did not see Mr S has the status of a fact’. This is perhaps an unusual meaning to communicate, but in other instances of the pattern ‘verb as NP/AdjP that…’ the verb combines felicitously with the qualitate qua meaning of as, as in the following example:

(26) The Supreme Court upheld the tribunal's jurisdiction to impose such a remedy once it had been established as a fact that women had been systematically discriminated against in the types of jobs at issue. (1990, COCA: ACAD)

We can paraphrase (26) as ‘the proposition that women had been systematically discriminated against in the types of jobs at issue is established qualitate qua a fact’.

For-NPs can also occur as Modifiers inside noun phrases:

(27) [_NP Tears for souvenirs] are all you've left me. (Song lyric by Frank Capano, composed by Billy Uhr)

(28) Sometimes nothing beats [_NP a warm serving of bread pudding for dessert] … that is, unless you top it with a drizzle of rich caramel and creme anglaise. (2015, LA Times)

(29) Dismissive of facts, starved of coherent arguments and apparently incredulous as to the nature of reality itself – Iain Duncan Smith really is [_NP a pathetic excuse for an MP]. (2018, Twitter)

Each example signals the qua-meaning. This becomes clear when we try to replace for with as. If we had as in (27) this would lead to a different meaning: ‘tears in their capacity as souvenirs’. This meaning does not fit well in the meaning expressed by the overall sentence, which is an existential statement about tears viewed ‘as being’ souvenirs.

However, the qualitate qua meaning is not excluded if the sentential context allows it, as in (30):

(30) The removal of rocks as souvenirs is considered taboo. (2016, NOW: Ireland)

In conclusion, for and as have often been regarded as interchangeable, with scholars suggesting that by the early twentieth century as became dominant in PDE at the expense of for.

I don’t think that this account is entirely accurate, and that instead of regarding these prepositions as being in competition, they each developed a unique semantics from the early twentieth century onwards, which can be characterised as Aristotelian qua (‘as being’) and qualitate qua (‘in its capacity/identity/role’), respectively.

Predicative for remains fully productive in English, alongside as, and survives in the patterns and constructions that allow the qua meaning.

References

Aarts, Bas (2023) Oblique predicative constructions in English with for and as: qua vs. qualitate qua. English Language and Linguistics 27.4, 773-788. Open access here.

Jespersen, Otto (1909–49) A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, 7 parts. London: George Allen and Unwin.

Poutsma, Hendrik (1914–29) A grammar of Late Modern English, 2 parts in 5 vols. Groningen: P. Noordhoff.

Ross, W. D. (ed.) (1924) Aristotle's Metaphysics, vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Online at https://bit.ly/3I27GOu

Shields, Christopher (ed.) (2012a) The Oxford Handbook of Aristotle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shields, Christopher (2012b) Being qua being. In Shields (2012a)(ed.), 343–71.

Visser, Frederik Th. (1963–73) An Historical Syntax of the English Language, 4 vols. Leiden: Brill.

Primary sources

Davies, Mark. 2008–. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). www.english-corpora.org/coca

Davies, Mark. 2010. The Corpus of Historical American English (COHA). www.english-corpora.org/coha

Davies, Mark. 2016–. Corpus of News on the Web (NOW). www.english-corpora.org/now

Davies, Mark. 2018. The iWeb Corpus. www.english-corpora.org/iWeb/Google Scholar

Lewis, Robert E. et al. (1952-2001)(eds.)The Middle English Dictionary. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Online edition in Middle English Compendium. Frances McSparran et al. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Library, 2000–18. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/middle-english-dictionary/CrossRefGoogle Scholar

The Oxford English Dictionary, 2000–. 3rd edn online. https://oed.com

1. What follows is based on Aarts (2023). Examples are mostly taken from this article.

2. A hapax is a phrase, construction, etc. that is attested just once.