0

I was reading about how lengthy wording is moved to end the Clause by placing everything in a what-phrase at the beginning of the clause. And, I found this example-

What he did was exceed our expectations and push performance art to a new level.

I can't understand why there is a plain form of verb used instead of past form. Was/were usually takes third or fourth form of verb or sometimes Infinitives too. But never bare infinitives or plain form.

Improve this question

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
1

What he did was [exceed our expectations] and [push performance art to a new level].

"What he did" is a noun phrase in a 'fused' relative construction. The fusion involves "what", which can be glossed as "that which" (or "the thing which").

In constructions where the subject noun phrase contains "do" in a relative clause, as it does here, the complement of "be" is restricted to infinitival clauses, either bare or with "to" added.

"Exceed our expectations" and "push performance art to a new level" form a coordination of two clauses, and since the first coordinate is an infinitival the second coordinate should also be one. Infinitival clauses contain a plain form of the verb, hence "exceed" and "push".

Improve this answer
1

We can analyze this sentence's structure as SVC (subject-verb-complement):

Subject: what he did
Verb: was
Complement: exceed our expectations and push performance art to a new level

The subject is a nominal clause. It is fairly straightforward, with the wh-word (which functions as the clause's direct object) fronted.

The complement (in this case a predicate nominative) is a series containing two conjunts connected by "and". Each conjunct is a nominal phrase headed by a bare infinitive (which I've put in bold). It is, indeed, somewhat unusual for a bare infinitive to head a nominal phrase, but it is correct. BillJ notes that this is possible because the nominal clause's main verb is "to do".

Here is an example of a similar construction from what I believe is a transcript of a House of Lords committee hearing ("House of Lords - Committee for Privileges and Conduct: The Conduct of Lord Laird - HL 96: 10th Report of Session 2013-14", pg. 211):

Subject: what you do
Verb: is
Complement: go outside and try to create the climate of opinion

By the way, this is sometimes called a "pseudo-cleft sentence". It is not the most typical kind of cleft sentence.

Improve this answer
4
  • @ MarclnManhattan I just read in Michael Swan book that when we have to Emphasise verbs in these types of sentences, Infinitives with 'to' and without 'to' are possible. Ex- what he did was (to) scream. But why he bracketed 'to' ? And in various other sources I found they much prefer Bare infinitive to full Infinitive.
    – RADS
    Feb 17, 2022 at 14:41
  • @RADS He bracketed "to" because it is optional. That sentence is correct whether "scream" is a bare or full infinitive.
    – MarcInManhattan
    Feb 17, 2022 at 17:48
  • 1
    It would be helpful to give the reason the complement consists of infinitival clauses. The crucial fact is that when the the subject noun phrase contains "do" in a relative clause, as it does here, the complement of "be" is restricted to infinitival clauses. Elsewhere there is no such restriction, cf. The funniest thing was Kim trying to hide in the coal-box.
    – BillJ
    Feb 18, 2022 at 15:21
  • @BillJ Done, thanks.
    – MarcInManhattan
    Feb 18, 2022 at 19:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .